Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010090032026 2026:GAU-AS:13661 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2471/2026 DEEP SORONGPHANG C/O- B. CH. SORONGPHANG, VILL.- UTTAR BIDYANAGAR, P.O., P.S. AND DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782442. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, ASSAM 2:NODAL OFFICER OF STATE OF ASSAM SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE SORUMOTORIA DILIP HUZURI PATH DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM-06. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DIST. HOJAI ASSAM OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HOJAI SANKARDEV NAGAR PIN- 782442. 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HOJAI OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SANKARDEV NAGAR PIN- 782442. 5:SUB-DIVISIONAL WELFARE OFFICER DIST. HOJAI OFFICER OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER Page No.# 2/3 HOJAI SANKARDEV NAGAR PIN- 782442 Advocate for the Petitioner : RAJU DEURI, MR. S K DEORI Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 14.09.2026 Heard Mr. P. Phongtosa, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Medhi, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 & 5; and Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned Standing Counsel, Social Justice and Empowerment Department for the respondent no. 2. 2. The petitioner has instituted the instant writ petition aggrieved by non-disbursement of relief prescribed by Rule 12[4] of the Scheduled Castes & the Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Rules, 1995 by the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent no. 2 to the family of the petitioner whose daughter is a victim in Hojai Police Station Case no. 254/2024 registered under Section 65[1], Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita [BNS], 2023 r/w Section 6, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012. The case, Hojai Police Station Case no. 254/2024 was investigated into and after completion of investigation, a Charge-Sheet bearing no. 265 was submitted on 22.10.2024 finding a prima facie case well established against the accused to proceed for trial for commission of the offences under Section 65[1], BNS r/w Section 6, POCSO Act. 3. Referring to Rule 12 of the Scheduled Castes & the Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Rules, 1998 [‘the 1995 Rules’] it is contended that the relief is required to be provided to the victim of atrocity, their family members and dependents according to the scale as provided in Annexure-I read with Annexure-II of the Schedule annexed to the 1995 Rules. Page No.# 3/3 4. The respondent no. 2 has filed an affidavit-in-opposition wherein it is stated that on receipt of a Report as regards estimate from the District Commissioner, Hojai on 20.02.2026, sanction was accorded by the Nodal Officer vide a Sanction Order dated 26.05.2026 for a total assessed relief amounting to Rs. 7,00,000/-, computed as per the Rules, 1995 read with Annexure-I of the Schedule to the 1995 Rules. It is stated that due to the Sanction for the amount of Rs. 7,00,000/-, a sum of Rs. 5,25,000/- being 75% of the total assessed relief amount, has already been sanctioned and credited through Direct Benefit Transfer in the Bank Account of the petitioner, he being the father and natural guardian of the minor victim. It is further stated that the remaining 25% of the total assessed relief amounting to Rs. 7,00,000/-, that is, Rs. 1,75,000/- will be released on completion of the trial strictly in terms of Rule 12[4] of the Rules, 1995. 5. Mr. Phongtosa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has already received the amount of Rs. 5,25,000/- and therefore, at this stage, the petitioner has no subsisting cause of action to proceed further with the writ petition. 6. Having regard to the projection made in the affidavit-in-opposition by the respondent no. 2 in the afore-stated manner and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already been granted the relief sought for in this writ petition and the petitioner is not pressing the writ petition at this stage, the writ petition is closed with the observation that the remaining 25% of the total assessed relief, that is, Rs. 1,75,000/- shall be released after completion of the trial. It is also open for the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy if he finds that the victim is entitled to any other relief under the law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant