Madras High Court Directs State To Pay Rs 10 Lakh Compensation To 3 Boys Sexually Assaulted By Father And Uncle

Justice AD Jagadish Chandira took note of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Bhanei Prasad, where the court emphasized compensation in such exceptional circumstances where the children are victims of incestuous sexual violence committed by a parent. The court thus thought it was a fit case to grant compensation since the children were subjected to assault over a period of years, resulting in post-traumatic stress disorder, which needed continuous therapy.

“Upon consideration of the above relevant factors and upon being guided by the quantum awarded by the Apex Court in Bhanei Prasad, supra, this Court holds that each of the victim children is entitled to the maximum compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- since they have been subjected to incestuous aggravated penetrative sexual assault over a period of years resulting in them suffering from post traumatic stress disorder which needs continuous therapy and rehabilitation,” the court said.

The court was taking up a criminal appeal filed by the mother and guardian of the victim children challenging the order of the POCSO Court to the limited extent of compensation. The trial court had sentenced the accused father and uncle to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,50,000, which was to be proportionally disbursed to the bank account of the three victim children.

The appellant mother married the accused father in 2006. In 2011, the mother's sister married the father's brother. The appellant had two boys and the sister had one boy and all of them were living together in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. During the time, in 2018, the mother caught the uncle showing pornographic content to the minor children. Later, she found out that the uncle and the father were giving stupefying agents and forcing the children to cooperate for sex. When the children refused, the father and uncle caused burn injuries. However, later the families came back to India and were residing at the mother's home.

Later in 2019, the mother learned that while they were living at her residence, the father and uncle would take the children to their home in between and committed penetrative sexual assault on them. The mother lodged a complaint based on which, case was registered. The final report was filed for offences under Section 5(i), 5(m), 5(n), and 5(l) of the POCSO Act. The trial court found the accused guilty and sentences them accordingly.

The trial court however refrained from granting compensation to the children citing that interim compensation of Rs 25,000 was already paid to each of the victims. Challenging this, the appeal was filed. The mother submitted that the children had suffered incestuous aggravated penetrative sexual assault continuously for a long period of time spanning over multiple years and had developed severe post traumatic stress disorder and ought to have awarded sufficient compensation to them.

The court noted that the trial court had given an extensive finding regarding the post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by the victim children. The court added that after having given such a finding, the trial court should have taken then into consideration an ensures that the victim children received adequate compensation for their past and future suffering arising out of the offence.

The court noted that the Tamil Nadu Child Victim Compensation Fund was established as per a Government Order issued by the Department of Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme, and provided the minimum and maximum compensation payable to victim children. Taking the same into consideration and the relevant factors in the present case, the court noted that the maximum compensation of Rs 10 Lakh was to be paid to the children.

The court thus directed the Commissioner/Director of Social Defence to disburse the compensation to the children, after adjusting the interim compensation and the fine amount. The court however made it clear that the judgment was only with respect to the quantum of victim compensation and will not have any ramification on the appeal filed by the accused.

Counsel for Appellants: Ms. Deepika Murali

Counsel for Respondents: Ms. J. R. Archana Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

Case Title: XXXX v State and Others

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 246

Case No: Crl. A. No.1443 of 2025