Act Within 3 Months: Allahabad High Court Slams UP Govt Over 'Unnecessary Resistance' To Relocating Hathras Victim's Family

Sparsh Upadhyay

25 Aug 2026 10:18 PM IST

  • Allahabad High Court, Hathras gang rape murder case, Hathras victim family relocation, Hathras victim rehabilitation, Ghaziabad relocation, Noida relocation, UP Government Hathras case, Hathras suo motu case, Justice Rajan Roy, Justice Jaspreet Singh, Hathras victim family rehabilitation,
    Listen to this Article

    The Allahabad High Court on Monday directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to rehabilitate and relocate the family of the Hathras gang rape and murder victim to Ghaziabad or Noida within 3 months, after finding "unnecessary resistance" on the State's part in complying with its earlier directions.

    A Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Jaspreet Singh observed that the State's decision dated February 22, 2025, offering the family rehabilitation at Kasganj, Etah or Aligarh, did not consider their request for relocation to Ghaziabad or Noida and was therefore "no decision in the eyes of law".

    The Court further directed that the compliance affidavit be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh, and warned that he would have to appear personally if the direction was not complied with.

    The directions came in the suo motu proceedings instituted by the High Court in 2020 following the Hathras rape and cremation incident, concerning the right to decent and dignified last rites/cremation.

    The Court noted that despite its earlier orders dated September 26, 2024, November 14, 2024, and January 8, 2025, the State had not properly considered the family's request for rehabilitation at Ghaziabad or Gautam Buddh Nagar. It observed:

    "There appears to be an unnecessary resistance by the State to a consideration as was ordered by us vide our order dated 26.09.2024, 14.11.2024 and 08.01.2025".

    The Bench further observed that the State counsel could only refer to the February 22, 2025 decision, which, according to the Court, "in fact is no decision in the eyes of law," because it did not even refer to the family's request for rehabilitation in Ghaziabad or Gautam Buddh Nagar.

    The Court said the State's conduct gave credence to the family's assertion that the State is treating it as an "adversarial litigation" and is "adamant not to grant" benefits to the victim's family.

    It may be noted that the High Court's July 26, 2022 order had directed the State Government to consider relocating the family to another place within Uttar Pradesh, outside Hathras, keeping in mind their social and economic rehabilitation and the educational needs of the children.

    The July 2022 direction was issued after the family members of the Hathras Rape victim conveyed to the Allahabad High Court that they wished to relocate to NOIDA as they did not feel safe in Hathras. The brother of the victim girl has also expressed his willingness to take up a government job in Noida.

    The State subsequently informed the Court that the family could choose among Aligarh, Etah and Kasganj, and that employment would be provided to one family member at the chosen place.

    The family, however, had sought rehabilitation in Delhi in connection with its pending proceedings before the Supreme Court.

    Subsequently, without prejudice to its rights before the Supreme Court, it indicated before the High Court that it would accept relocation to Ghaziabad or Noida, where other family members reside.

    On November 14, 2024, the High Court directed the family to submit a formal application before the District Magistrate, Hathras. The application was thereafter submitted on December 2, 2024, seeking relocation/rehabilitation at Ghaziabad/Gautam Buddh Nagar.

    However, the State's February 22, 2025, decision ultimately offered only Kasganj, Etah and Aligarh as the places for relocation. The High Court found that it did not contain even a cursory reference to the family's request for Ghaziabad/Gautam Buddh Nagar.

    Having found the State's response inadequate, the Court went beyond directing the Government to reconsider the matter. It directed:

    "We accordingly set aside the decision dated 22.02.2025 and direct the State Government to rehabilitate and relocate the victim's family in Ghaziabad or Noida, as the case may be, positively within three months".

    The Court also directed that, once the rehabilitation takes place, employment to one of the family members, as directed in its July 26, 2022 order, should also be provided.

    The compliance affidavit is to be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home). The Court said that in case of non-compliance, the officer would have to appear before it on the next date.

    The Bench noted that it had intended to proceed with the final hearing on the merits concerning the cremation issue, but considered it necessary first to ensure compliance with its earlier directions.

    The Court also revisited its earlier observation regarding the remedy available before the Special Court. It clarified that this did not prevent the High Court from intervening where "exceptional circumstances exist for approaching the High Court".

    Finding such exceptional circumstances in the State's 'intransigence' and non-compliance with its earlier orders, the Court held that the Special Court may not be suited to consider the issue and that the High Court should step in.

    The matter has been listed for November 30, 2026.

    The proceedings arise from the 2020 Hathras case, involving the rape of a 19-year-old woman belonging to the Scheduled Caste community, followed by her cremation in the early hours of September 29-30, 2020, in circumstances that appeared to be against the wishes of her family.

    The High Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the matter to examine issues concerning the right to decent and dignified last rites/cremation. The proceedings have subsequently also dealt with the family's rehabilitation, relocation, security and other reliefs.

    Read more about Court's previous orders in the matter here, here and here.

    Sparsh Upadhyay

    Sparsh Upadhyay

    Sparsh Upadhyay is an Associate Editor with LiveLaw.

    Next Story