C.W.P. No.22798 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.22798 of 2011 Date of Decision. 08.12.2011 Satpal son of Shri Mam Raj, resident of Ward No.18, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks for compensation as a rape victim, which is said to have been established against respondent Nos.2 to 6 and who are said to be undergoing conviction and imprisonment for the offences committed. The State is also made a party here and compensation is sought on the general ground that the State ought to have protected the petitioner against rape being committed by respondent Nos.2 to 6. 2. We have not come by any dispensation that the State is made responsible for every rape committed by private individuals. Compensation for rape victim is an area where the legislation has not moved towards compensating every individual, who has undergone a suffering at the hands of private individuals. The petitioner will have an independent right of action against the private respondents by properly instituted suit. A writ remedy against the private respondents would C.W.P. No.22798 of 2011 -2- also not be appropriate in my view especially when the Criminal Court had not granted compensation at the time when the judgment of conviction was rendered and therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 08, 2011 Pankaj*