Sh. Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Miss Subhra Chakraborty
S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J. Subhra Chakraborty (alias - Kalpaoa) who
was student of the Baptist College, Kohima where the opposite party, Shri
Bodhisattwa Gautam was a lecturer, filed a complaint in the Court of the
G Judicial Magistrate, !st Class, Kohima, Nagaland, alleging, inter alia, as
under:-
"3. That, your complainaot begs to state that in April 1989 the
accused person entered into Baptist College, Kol1ima as a Lecturer
thereof and the complainant was a student of the said College at
H that relevant period.
BODHISATIW Av. SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY [S. SAGHIRAHMAD, J.] 735
4. That, the accused person was in said Service in Kohima from A
April 1989 till he resigned the Service on 27th Jan, 1995 and was
residing in a rented house in Kenezou Valley, Kohima owned by
Dr. Zakiebatsu Angam.
5. That, on 6th Feb. 1995 the accused person left for Silchar and
presently residing in his uncle's (Shri Amiya Kanta Cha~raborty) B
house in Premtala, Silchar-4, Dist. Cachar, in the State of Assam
and assumed his service as Lecturer in Cachar College (Commerce
Dept.) Silchar - 4 (Assam).
6. That, on the 10th June, 1989 for the 1st time the accused visited C
the complainant's residence in Kohima and thereafter often he
used to visit complainant's residence, as a teacher he was respected
by the complainant as well as all the members including her
parents. In course of such visits once in the month of Nov. 1989
the accused voluntarily told your complainant that he was already
in her love. Thus there developed a love affair between themselves D
since 1989.
7. That, the complainant most humbly states further that with
malafide intention to practise deception on the complainant, the
accused gave false assurance of marriage to the innocent com- E
plainant and thereby the accused dishonestly procured sexual
intercourse with the complainant. The accused often use to induce
the complainant to have biological contact with him, but whenever
he was approached by the complainant to complete the marriage
ceremony, the accused very tactfully used to defer the marriage
sometimes saying that he was waiting for his parents formal consent F
and sometimes saying to cooperate him till he got a Govt. Service.
8. That, in course of continuation of the affairs between the
complainant and the accused, the complainant got pregnant twice,
once in the month of September, 1993 and secondly on in the G
month of April 1994 out of her co-habitation with the accused
person.
9. That, the complainant being worried about her said pregnancy
created pressure upon the accused to marry her immediately and
to save her from being ruined, but the accused on the plea of his H
736 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.<;:.R.
parents permission went on deffering the marriage, as a result
there was a quarrel in between the complainant and the a·ccused,
where after the accused lastly opined for secret marriage to avoid
social gathering as he was waiting for his parents permission. The
complainant being pregnant was placed in a very awkward position,
as such, agreed to said secret marriage, accordingly the accused
on the 20th September, 1993, married the complainant in front of
the God he Worships in his residence in Kenozou Valley, Kohima
by putting Vermilion ( sindur) on the complainant's forehead and
accepted the complainant as his lawful wife and thus the com
plainant was consorted and consoled. But the complainant faced
further corporal punishment, as the accused kept on insisting the
complainant to be refrained from giving birth to the baby and was
pressurising her to undergo operation/abortion despite her refusal
for the same. The accused with fraudulent intention to deceive the
complainant proposed the said abortion on the plea that birth of
the baby would be a barrier to convince his parents to accept the
complainant as their daughter-in-law and such event would lead
the complainant to a path of unhappiness. The complainant being
an innocent lady failed to understand the accused's wicked and
mischievous plan whereby the accused succeeded and dishonestly
motivated the complainant for abortion and compelled the com
plainant to undergo operation in the Putonou Clinic, Kohima and
aborted in October '93.
10. That, the said Ceremony of giving Sindur (Vermilion) on the
complainant's forehead by the accused in front of the God made
the complainant to believe that she was lawfully married wife of
the accused and with such believe she in good faith completely
submitted herself to the accused as an ideal wife and never dis
believed the accused. The complainant even did not have any doubt
as to why the accused insisted her to keep their marriage secret.
The complainant was forced to undergo abortion even second time
in the month of April '94 in the CAREWELL NURSING HOME
at Dimapur with the pretext that if the complainant gave birth to
any child before the accused could convince his parents she would
never be accepted by Bodhisatta's parents and relatives further
their marriage being a secret one, the developed stage of the
complainant would hamper the dignity of her own parents and
BODHISATIWAv. SUBHRACHAKRABORTY [S.SAGHIRAHMAD, J.] 737
other paternal relations irreparably and thus taking the privilege A
of complainant innocency the accused has exploited the com
plainant in a very pre-planned way. The accused is so wicked that
he even furnished a false name in the said Nursing Home and
signed the consent Register/Paper as BIKASH GAUTAM con
cealing his real name BODHISATTA GAUTAM which fact was B
unknown to the innocent complainant until! recently and came to
know only in the 2nd week of Frebruary, 1995 when the com
plainant went to obtain a certified copy of the abortion consent
paper of the accused.
A copy of said consent paper signed by the accused is annexed C
hereto and marked as Annexure-1.
11. That, odieving herself to be the lawful wife of the accused, the
complainant like a dumb shouldered up all those hardship since
1989. On hearing the message that the accused would go to Silchar, D
the complainant on 4th Feb. '95 went down to Dimapur and visited
the accused to take the complainant permanently with the accused
to Silchar as he was going to Silchar to join as a Lecturer in a
Government College named CACHAR COLLEGE which both of
them actually waited for. But the wicked accused forgetting the
consequences of his all fraudulent activities in total disregards of E
their marriage and their relationship refused to accept the com
plainant as his wife and abandoned the complainant asking her to
forget all her dream. Be it furhter submitted that the accused's
friends namely (1) Shri Subrata Datta, (2) Shri Ranadhir Deb (3)
Shri Prasanta Dey and ( 4) Shri Pradeep Paul of Dimapur tried a F
lot to convince the accused and not to abandon the complainant
in such a cruel manner, as he had already married the complainant
and co-habited years together, but all efforts ended in futility as
the accused in reply said that the giving ·of vermilion on
complainant's forehead was pretext of marriage to over come the
past situations and not at all a complete marriage and the accused G
repeatedly said that he had no option, but to abandon the com
plainant as his parents are not agreeable to accept the complainant
as their daughter-in-law.
12. That, the accused not only induced the complainant and co- H
habited with her, giving her a false assurance of marriage but also
fraudulently gave through certain marriage ceremony with
knowledge that was not a valid marriage and thereby dishonestly
made the complaint to believe that she was a lawfully married wife
of the accused. The accused even committed the offence of mis
carriage by compelling the complainant to undergo abortion twice
against her free will. The way the accused exploited the com
plainant and abandoned her is nothing but an act of grave cruelty
as the same has caused serious injury and danger to the
complainant's health both mentally and physically, as such, the
accused above named has committed Criminal offences punishable
UIS 312/420/493/496/498-A of Indian Penal Code."
This complaint was registered as Criminal Case No. 1/95 under
Sections 312/420/493/496/498-A, Indian Penal Code and Bodhisattwa
Gautam was summoned but he, in the meantime, filed a petition in the
D Gauhati High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Crimi~ai P~;;~edur~ ·
for quashing of the complaint and the proceedings initiated on its basis, on
the ground that the allegations, taken at their face-value, do not make out
any case against him. But the High Court by its judgment and order dated
May 12, 1995, dismissed the petition compelling Bodhisattwa Gautam to
approach this Court by way of Special Leave Petition. Special Leave
E Petition (Criminal) No. 2675/95 was filed and was dismissed by us by our
order dated October 20, 1995, in which we stated as under :-
"We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment
of the High Court. We dismiss the special leave petition. Having
done so, we further take suo motu notice to the facts of this case
as narrated in the complainant which has been read before us. We
issue notice to the petitioner as to why he should not be asked to
pay reasonable maintenance per month to the respondent during
the pendency of the prosecution proceedings against him. Mr. A.
Bhattacharjee accepts notice.
List it on 1.12.1995.
Petitioner in person be present in Court on the next date of
hearing. Notice be also sent to the respondent along with the copy
H of this order."
BODHISATIWAv. SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY (S. SAGHIRAHMAD, J.] 739
Pursuant to the above order, Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam put in ap- A
pearance and filed an affidavit in reply in which he denied the allegation
made against him in the complaint and stated that the complaint was filed
only to harass and humiliate him and, therefore, there was no occasion to
direct him to pay any amount as maintenance to the respondent. He also
indicated that although he had taken up service in another College, namely, B
Cachar College, his services had since been terminated. Para 4 of his
affidavit in which these facts have been stated is reproduced below :-
"4. That I say that I am not in any employment now and I am an
unemployed person after my services as a Lecturer in Cachar
College, Silchar, has been terminated with effect from 16.7.1995 C
by a resolution of the Governing Body of the said College passed
in a meeting held on 14.9.1995. A true copy of the proceedings of
the '~id meeting of the Governing Body of Cachar College, Silchar
held on 14.9.1995 is annexed hereto as Anne.xure -Al.
The relevant resolution No.5(A) of the said meeting of the D
Governing Body reads as follow :-
"Resolution No. 5(A) :-
The Principal placed the leave petitions of Shri B. Gautam,
Lecturer, Deptt. of Commerce, adding thai Shri Gautam E
resumed his duties in the College on the re-opening day of
the College after summer vacation, i.e., on 15th of July, 1995
and at first he sought leave for twenty one days and the for
three years at a stretch.
The Principal also stated that Shri B. Gautam was ap
pointed against a lien vacancy for one year vice Dr. A.
Mazumdar, the one-year lien having expired on 9.9.1995.
The matter was thoroughly discussed and it was unani
mously resolved that since Shri B. Gautam's term of appoint- G
ment against lien vacancy had expired on 9.9.1995 and _his
service was not confirmed, (he did not complete even one full
year's service), he cannot be granted three years' leave at a
stretch as prayed for by him.
Also resolved that as Shri B. Gautam has been absent from H
740
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
the College from 16th of July, 1995 and also the term of his
appointment expired on 9.9.1995, Shri Gautam's service as
lecturer in the Deptt. of Commerce in Cachar College, Sil
char be treated as having been terminated w.e.f. 16th July,
1995.
The Principal be requested to forward the above resolution
to the D .P .I. Assam, for his kind approval of the termination
of the services of Sri B. Gautam w.e.f. 16.7.1995."
This resolution along with other resolutions passed in the said
meeting held on 14.9.1995 were placed before the meeting of the
Governing Body held subsequently on 11.11.1995 for confirmation.
A true copy of the notice of meeting to be held on 11.11.1995
containing the agenda of the meeting is annexed hereto as An
nexure -A2.
Now I have been reliably informed that in the meeting of the
Governing Body on 11.11.1995, the aforesaid resolution terminat
ing my service has been confirmed. I further state that I have not
received any payment towards my salary since July, 1995 and after
the termination of my service with effect from 16.7.1995 no ques
tion of my receiving any salary arises.
In the circumstances I respectfully submit that no question of
burdening me with the liability of paying maintenance to the
respondent can arise."
F The facts set out in the complaint lodged against Bodhisattwa
Gautam indicate that there was initially a period of romance during which
Bodhisattwa Gautam used to visit the house of Subhra Chakraborty and on
one occasion, he told her that he was in love with her and ultimately
succeeded, on the basis of his assurances to marry her, in developing sexual
relationship with her with the tragic result that Subhra Chakraborty became
G pregnant. While in that state, she persuaded Gautam to marry her, but he,
deferred the proposal on the plea that he had to take his parents' permis
sion. He, however, agreed to marry her secretly. Consequently, on 20th
September, 1993, Bodhisattwa Gautam took her before the God he wor
shiped and put Vermilion on her forehead and accepted her as his lawful
H wife. In spite of the secret marriage, he, through his insistence, succeeded
BODHISATIWAv. SUBHRACHAKRABOR1Y [S.SAGHIRAHMAD,J.) 741
in motivating her for an abortion which took place in a clinic at Kohima in A
October, 1993. Subhra Chakraborty became pregnant second time and at
the instance of Bodhisattwa Gautam she had to abort again in April, 1994
in the Carewell Nursing Home at Dimapur where Gautam signed the
consent paper and deliberately mentioned himself as Bikash Gautam.
The Gauhati High Conrt, as already pointed out above, refused to B
quash the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1/95 pending in the Court of
the Judicial Magistrate, !st Class, Kohima and this Court has upheld the
judgment of the Gauhati High Court. The question is whether any further
order can be passed in the case and Gautam can be compelled to pay
maintenance to Subhra Chakraborty during the pendency of the Criminal C
Case for which Show Cause Notice has been issued to him?
This Court, as the highest Court of the country, has a variety of
jurisdiction. Under Article 32 of the Constitution, it has the jurisdiction to
enforce the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution by issuing D
writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo-War
ranto and Certiorari. Fundamental Rights can be enforced even against
private bodies and individuals. Even the right to approach the Supreme
Court for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights under· Article 32
itself is a Fundamental Right. The jurisdiction enjoyed by this Court under
Article 32 is very wide as this Court, while considering a petition for the E
enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Part III of
the Constitution, can declare an Act to be ultra vires or beyond the
competence of the legislature and has also the power to award compensa
tion for the violation of the Fundamental Rights. See : Rudul Sah v. State
of Bihar, AIR (1983) SC 1086 and Peoples' Union for Democratic Rights F
(through its Secretary & Anr.) v. Police Commissioner, Delhi Police HQs. &
Anr., [1989) 4 SCC 730.
For the exercise of this jurisdiction, it is not necessary that the person
who is the victim of violation of his fundamental right should personally
approach the Court as the Court can itself take cognizance of the matter G
and proceed suo motu or on a petition of any public spirited individual.
This Court through its various decisions, has already given new dimensions,
meaning and purpose to many of the fundamental rights especially the
Right to Freedom and Liberty and Right to Life. The Directive Principles
of the State Policy,. have also been raised by this Court from their static H
742 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A and unenforceable concept to a level as high as that of the fundamental
rights.
This Court has, innumerable times, declared that "Right to Life" docs
not merely mean animal existence but means something more, namely, the
right to live with human dignity. (See : Francis Coralie Mullin v. The
B Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi & Ors., AIR (1981) SC 746; State of
Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan, AIR (1983) SC 803; Olga Tellis & Ors. v.
Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors., AIR (1986) SC 180 and Delhi
Transport Corporation v. D. T.C. Mazdoor Congress & Ors., AIR (1991) SC
101.) Right to Life would, therefore, include all those aspects of life which
C to make a life meaningful, complete and worth-living.
Unfortunately, a woman, in our country, belongs to a class or group
of society who are in a disadvantaged position on account of several social
barriers and impediments and have, therefore, been the victim of tyranny
D at the hands of men with whom they, fortunately, under the Constitution
enjoy equal status. Women also have the right to life and liberty; they also
have the right to be respected and treated as equal citizens. Their honour
and dignity cannot be touched or violated. They also have the right to lead
an honourable and peaceful life. Women, in them, hove many personalities
combined. They are Mother, Daughter, Sister and Wife and not play things
E for centre spreads in various magazines, periodicals or newspapers nor can
they be exploited for obscene purposes. They mnst have the Eberty, the
freedom and, of course, independence to live the roles assigned to them
by Nature so that the society may flourish as they alone have the talents
and capacity to shape the destiny and character of men anywhere and in
F every part of the world.
Rape is thus not only a crime against the person of a woman (victim),
it is a cirme against the entire society. It destroys the entire psychology of
a woman and pushes her into deep emotional crises. It is only by her sheer
will power that she rehabilitates herself in the society which, on coming to
G know of the rape, looks down upon her in derision and contempt. Rape is,
therefore, the most hated crime. It is a crime against basic human rights
anu is also violative of the victim's most cherished of the Fundamental
Rights, namely, the Right to Life contained in Article 21. To many faminists
and psychiatrists, rape is less a sexual offence than an act of aggression
H aimed at degrating and humiliating women. The rape laws do not, un-
BODHISATIW Av. SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY [S. SAGHIRAHMAD, J.] 743
forunately, take care of the social aspect of the matter and are inept in A
many respects.
It is said that present days' law relating to rape have their origin in
1736 in Britain, when Sir Mathew Hale in his Historia Placitornm Coronae
or, in other words, "History of the Pleas of the Crown" presented common-
law rape doctrines which were immediately noticed to be hostile to the B
interests of women as one of the requirement was to inform the jury during
trial that rape charges were easy to bring but difficult to defend Conse
quently, in a tide of law reforms, this requirement was removed. The rule
of corroboration which was much stricter in a trial for the offence of rape
than for other offences was also largely removed from law. C
In India also the rule of "Corroboration of the Prosecutrix" has
undergone a change through statutory amendments as also through
decisions of this Court.
In State of Himachal Pradesh v. Raghubir Singh, (1993] 2 SCC 622, D
this Court observed as under :-
"There is no legal compulsion to look for corroboration of the
evidence of the prosecutrix before recording an order of convic
tion. Evidence has to be weighed and not counted. Conviction can E
be recorded on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, if her
evidence inspires confidence and there is absence of circumstances
which militate her veracity. In the present case the evidence of the
prosecutrix is found to be reliable and trustworthy. No corrobora
tion was required to be looked for, though enough was available
on the record. The medical evidence provided sufficient cor- F
roboration."
In State of Karnataka v. Mahabaleshwar Gourya Naik, AIR (1992) SC
2043=[1992] Suppl. 3 SCC 179, the Court went to the extent of laying down
that even if the victim of rape is not available to give evidence on account G
of her having committed suicide, the prosecution case cannot be thrown
away over board. In such a case, the non-availability of the victim will not
be fatal and the Court can record a conviction on the basis of the available
evidence brought on record by the prosecution.
In spite of the decision of this Court that (depending upon the H
A circumstances of the case) corroboration of the prosecutrix was not neces
sary, the cases continued to end in aquittal on account of mishandling of
the crime by the police and the invocation of the theory of "consent' by the
Courts who tried the offence. To overcome this difficulty, the legislature
intervened and introduced Section 114-A in the Evidence Act by Act No.
B 43 of 1983 reading as under :-
"114-A. Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecutions
for rape.- In a prosecution for rape under clause (a) or clause (b)
or clause ( c) or clause ( d) or clause ( e) or clause (g) of sub-section
(2) of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code ( 45 of 1860), where
C sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is
whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have
been raped and she states in her evidence before the Court that
she did not consent, the Court shall presume that she did not
consent.
11
D This Section enables a court to raise a presumption that the woman
who w~ the victim of rape had not consented and that the offence was
committed against her will. The situation, however, has hardly improved.
Conviction rates for rape are still lower than any other major crime and
the woman continue to argue even today that in rape cases the victimised
E women, rather than the rapists, were put on trial. A large number of women
still fail to report rapes to the police because they fear embarrassing and
insensitive treatment by the doctors, the law enforcement personnel and/or
the cross-examining defence attorneys. The fear has to be allayed from the
minds of women so that if and when this crime is committed, the victim
may promptly report the matter to the police and on a chargesheet being
F submitted, the trial may proceed speedily without causing any embarrass
ment to the prosecutrix who may come in the witness box without fear
psychosis.
We may, at this stage, refer to a decision of this Court in Delhi
G Domestic Working Women's F01um v. Union of India, (1995] 1 SCC 14, in
which Court observed as under :-
"It is rather unfortunate that in recent times, there has been an
increase in violence against women causing serious concern. Rape
does indeed pose a series of problems for the criminal justice
H system. There are cries for harshest penalties, but often times such
BODHISATIWA v. SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY (S. SAGHIRAHMAD, J.) 745
crimes eclipse the real plight of the victim. Rape is an exp~rience A
which shakes the foundations of the lives of the victims. For many,
its effect is a long-term one, impairing their capacity for personal
relationships, altering their behaviour values and generating and
less fears. In addition to the trauma of the rape itselts, victims have
had to suffer further agony during legal proceedings."
This Court further observed as under :-
"The defects in the present system are : Firstly, complaints are
handled roughly and are not even such attention as is warranted.
The victims, more often than not, are humiliated by the police. The C
victims have invariably found rape trials a traumatic experience.
The experience of giving evidence in court has been negative and
destructive. The victims often say, they considered the ordeal to
be even worse than the rape itself. Undoubtedly, the court
proceedings added to and prolonged the psychological stress they D
had had to suffer as a result of the rape itself.
In this backround, it is necessary to indicate the broad parameters
in assisting the victims of rape.
(1) The complainants of sexual assault cases should be provided E
with legal representation. It is important to have some one who is
well-acquainted with the criminal justice system. The role of the
victim's advocate would not only be to explain to the victim the
nature of the proceedings, to prepare her for the case and to assist
her in the police station and in court but to provide her with p
guidance as to how she might obtain help of a different nature
from other agencies, for example, mind counselling or medical
assistance. It is important to secure continuity of assistance by
ensuring that the same person. who looked after the complainant's
interests in the police station represnet her till the end of the case.
(2) Legal assistance will have to be provided at the police station
since the victim of sexual assault might very well be in a distressed
state upon arrival at the police station, the guidance and support
of a lawyer at this stage and whilst she was being questioned would
be of great assistance to her. H
746 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
(3) The police should be under a duty to inform the victim of her
right to representation before any questions were asked of her and
that the police report should state that the victim was so informed.
(4) A list of advocates willing to act in these cases should be kept
at the police station for victims who did not have a particular
lawyer in mind or whose own lawyer was unavailable.
(5) The advocate shall be appointed by the court, upon application
by the police at the earliest convenient movement, but in order to
ensure that victims were questioued without undue delay, advo
cates would be authorised to act at the police station before leave
of the court was sought or obtained.
(6) In all rape trials anonymity of the victims must be maintained,
as far as necessary.
(7) It is necessary, having regard to the Directive Principles con
tained under Article 38(1) of the Constitution of India to set up
Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. Rape victims frequently
incur substantial financial loss. Some, for example, are too
traumatised to continue in employment.
(8) Compensation for victims shall be awarded by the court on
conviction of the offender and by the Criminal Injuries Compen
sation Board whether or not a conviction has taken place. The
Board will take into account pain, suffering and shock as well as
loss of earnings due to pregnancy and the expenses of the child
but if this occurred as a result of the rape.
In the present situation, the third respondent will have to evolve
such scheme as to wipe out the fears of such unfortunate victims.
Such a scheme shall be prepared within six months from the date
of this judgment. Thereupon, the Union of India, will examine the
same and shall take necessary steps for the implementation of the
scheme at the earliest.
11
This decision recognises the right of the victim for compensation by
providing that it shall be awarded by the Court on conviction of the
offender subject to the finalisation of Scheme by the Central Government.
H If the Court trying an offence of rape has jurisdiction to award the
BODHISATIWA v. SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY [S. SAGHIRAHMAD,J.] 747
compensation at the final stage, there is no reason to deny to the Court A
the right to award interim compensation which should also be provided in
the Scheme. On the basis of principles set out in the aforesaid decision in
Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum, the jurisdiction to pay interim
compensation shall be treated to be part of the over all jurisdiction of the
Courts trying the offences of rape which, as pointed out above is an offence B
against basic human rights as also the Fnndamental Right of Personal
Liberty and Life.
Apart from the above, this Court has the inherent jurisdiction to pass
any order it consists fit and proper in the interest of justice or to do
complete justice between the parties. C
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case in
which there is a serious allegation that Bodhisattwa Gautam had married
Subhra Chakraborty before the God he worshiped by putting Vermilion on
her forehead and accepting her as his wife and also having impregnated
her twice resulting in abortion on both the occasions, we, on being prim a- D
facie satisfied, dispose of this matter by providing that Bodhisattwa Gautam
shall pay to Subhra Chakraborty a sum of Rs. 1,000 every month as interim
compensation dmring the pendency of Criminal Case No. 1/95 in the court
of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kohima, Nagaland. He shall also be liable
to pay arrears of compensation at the same rate from the date on which E
the complaint was filed till this date. We may further observe that whatever
has been said in this Judgment shall not, in any way, affect or prejudice
the Magistrate from deciding the complaint on merits on the basis of the
evidence as may be tendered before it and in accordance with law.
v.s.s. Petition disposed of.