Supreme Court upholds Allahabad High Court order directing Uttar Pradesh to employ kin, relocate family of Hathras rape and murder victim

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed Uttar Pradesh (UP) government's plea challenging Allahabad High Court's direction to consider employing a family member of the Hathras gang rape and murder victim, and to relocate the family from Hathras..A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud said that the facilities provided to the family should not be interfered with and added that a State should not involve itself in such matters."These are facilities provided to the family. We should not interfere. State should not come up in these matters," the Court said..UP Additonal Advocate General Garima Prashad informed the Court that the state was prepared to relocate the victim's family, but they wanted to be shifted to Ghaziabad or Delhi. She also mentioned that the eligibility of the elder married brother of the victim as a "dependent" was a question of law..However, the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the special facts and circumstances of the case..The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court had in July 2022 directed the Uttar Pradesh government to evaluate the possibility of providing employment to a family member of the Hathras gang rape victim and to move the family to another part of the state to aid in their social and economic rehabilitation..The Court passed the judgment in a suo moto case initiated by the Court after it took cognizance of the Hathras gang rape and murder of a girl belonging to a Scheduled Caste in September 2020 and her cremation in the wee hours of the night by State authorities. .The Allahabad High Court, while examining the case, observed that the family of the Hathras gang rape victim required employment, and the State's promise to provide it was not arbitrary. Therefore, the State was ordered to provide a job suitable for the qualifications of a family member within three months.The Court also considered the victim's family's social and economic circumstances and their mental state while addressing the plea for relocation. Given the attention the case had garnered, it was assumed that it would be difficult for the family to remain in the village. The court directed the State to make a decision on the matter within six months.