logo
Telangana breaks new ground by allocating houses to atrocity survivors

Telangana breaks new ground by allocating houses to atrocity survivors

The Hindu16-07-2025
For years, Kumari Hema* never truly belonged anywhere. A 32-year-old mother of one, she moved from colony to colony in Hyderabad, chased by whispers, evicted by landlords, and judged by neighbours who recoiled the moment they learnt the truth: that she was a survivor of sexual assault.
'We used to skip meals just to pay ₹3,500 in rent for a place that barely felt like a home,' she recalled, her voice quivering with emotion. 'Even then, the owners would harass us,' she said.
That burden, she says, has now been lifted.
Hema is one of several survivors who have been allotted a 2BHK flat in newly-built community housing in the city's emerging residential hubs. This is part of an initiative by the Telangana government under its Indiramma Indlu housing scheme. The homes are being allotted to Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) victims of serious crimes, including rape and murder cases, where convictions have been secured, with the aim of offering safety, dignity and a fresh start.
'Now, no one can ask me to leave. I have a house of my own. My name is on the patta certificate. For someone whose name was once on an FIR, this feels like a real identity,' she said, smiling through her eyes.
For 27-year-old Sonal*, life too had come to a halt after she was sexually assaulted. A promising engineering student at the time, she dropped out of college and retreated from the world due to the trauma and pain the incident brought. Now, years later, she has cleared the Telangana Law Common Entrance Test and is preparing to start an LLB course through distance education in about a month.
'I stopped believing that a future was even possible,' the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) victim said. 'But things are changing. I've got a second chance in my studies, in my marriage, and now in my own new home.' Sonal, who works part-time as a teacher got married six months ago and is about to move into her new flat with her husband. She is already scouting for nearby schools to work at while continuing her education.
Sudha Laxmi*, 35, a mother of two and a domestic worker, has lived in the same locality for nearly three decades. But familiarity did not spare her from stigma after she was assaulted, even after the perpetrator was convicted. 'Neighbours never let me forget it. I faced taunts for years,' she said. 'I'm relieved to leave it all behind.'
The women are waiting for final plumbing and electrical work to be completed before they shift into the apartments, built as part of the first phase of the government's broader housing initiative for atrocity victims. Under this phase, 43 survivors in Cyberabad and 25 from Rachakonda have been allotted homes.
The district's SC Development Wing, in collaboration with the police, compiles lists of eligible victims. These are cases from 2014 onwards that ended in conviction. The focus, officials say, is on verified cases to avoid legal complications and ensure security.
'These are people who were not just victims of crime, but also of societal neglect. The least we can do is give them a sense of belonging,' said a senior police officer associated with the project.
'The entire process is handled discreetly. In most cases, they are moved into neighbourhoods where others from their community already live.'
The 2BHK homes themselves are simple but sufficient. Each flat is 560 square feet, with two bedrooms, a hall, a kitchen, and two bathrooms. The kitchen opens out onto a small balcony with a washing area. Many occupants have chosen to upgrade the flooring, add tiles or false ceilings, or personalise the space in a small but meaningful ways.
*Names have been changed to protect the identities of the survivors.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Never search THESE 4 things on Google, it can land you in trouble or even in jail, the things are...
Never search THESE 4 things on Google, it can land you in trouble or even in jail, the things are...

India.com

time6 hours ago

  • India.com

Never search THESE 4 things on Google, it can land you in trouble or even in jail, the things are...

The internet has become a part of our daily lives. Whenever we don't understand something or want to learn more about a topic, we often turn to Google first. But did you know that not everything should be searched on Google? Yes, that's right, as some searches can actually land you in serious trouble. Your IP address (the digital ID of your device) can be tracked, and if you're looking up something suspicious, intelligence agencies or the police may even come to your home. In extreme cases, you could even end up in jail. Never search for how to make a bomb One of the most dangerous things you can search is how to make a bomb or any kind of weapon. These kinds of searches are monitored very closely by national security agencies. If you try to look up anything like this, it may raise a red flag. Authorities might consider it a suspicious activity, and local police could come to question you. If they find any connection to illegal or harmful activity, you could be arrested. Never search for how to hack devices If you go on Google and search for things like 'how to hack a device,' 'how to crack passwords,' or try to download hacking tools, you could come under the radar of the cybercrime unit. Learning or attempting to hack is illegal. Even just looking up how it's done can make you look suspicious, and the police might call you in for questioning. If you are found doing any kind of hacking, you could even be arrested. Never search for pirated movies Many people try to avoid paying for OTT subscriptions or movie tickets by searching for free movies on Google. They often end up watching or downloading pirated versions of films. But this is also against the law. Downloading or streaming pirated content is a criminal offense under India's copyright laws. If caught, you could face heavy fines or even jail time. Never search for child pornographic content on Google Searching for child pornographic content on Google is not just wrong, but it is a serious criminal offense. Such searches are illegal all over the world, including in India. If you attempt to search for this type of content, you could face strict legal action under India's POCSO Act (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences). The punishment can include long-term imprisonment and heavy fines. The cybercrime unit constantly monitors such online activities, and anyone found doing this can be tracked, investigated, and arrested. So, it's always better to stay safe and avoid searching for anything illegal, violent, or inappropriate on the internet.

'Shields minors': Centre Defends Statutory Age Of 18 Years For Consent In Top Court
'Shields minors': Centre Defends Statutory Age Of 18 Years For Consent In Top Court

NDTV

time14 hours ago

  • NDTV

'Shields minors': Centre Defends Statutory Age Of 18 Years For Consent In Top Court

New Delhi: The Centre has defended in the Supreme Court the statutory age of consent of 18 years, saying the decision was a "deliberate, well-considered, and coherent" policy choice aimed at shielding minors from sexual exploitation. The Centre, in its written submissions through Additional Solicitor General Aishwaraya Bhati, argued diluting the age of consent or introducing exceptions under the guise of adolescent romance would be not only legally unsound but also dangerous. The government said it would provide a defence mechanism even to those abusers who exploit a child's emotional dependence or silence. The Centre further said the existing statutory age of consent must be strictly and uniformly enforced. "Any departure from this standard, even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy, would amount to rolling back decades of progress in child protection law, and undermine the deterrent character of statutes like the POCSO (the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act, 2012 and the BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).' Moreover, the Centre argued that the discretion on case-to-case basis must remain judicial and must not be read into the statute as a general exception or a diluted standard. 'Introducing a legislative close-in-age exception or reducing the age of consent would irrevocably dilute the statutory presumption of vulnerability that lies at the heart of child protection law. A diluted law risks opening the floodgates to trafficking and other forms of child abuse under the garb of consent,' it said. Lowering the age of consent, the Centre said, would open the "floodgates" to trafficking and other forms of child abuse under the garb of assent. The case before the top court raises the point of age in adolescent relationships. 'The legislative determination to fix the age of consent at eighteen (18) years, and to treat all sexual activities with a person below that age as an offence irrespective of purported consent, is a product of a deliberate, well-considered, and coherent statutory policy,' the Centre said. The law does not treat the age limit as arbitrary and rather, it reflects a constitutional and legislative recognition of a minor's vulnerability, especially in a socio-economic context marked by deep inequalities and power imbalances, it added. A child's inability to report or resist is exacerbated when the perpetrator is a parent or close family member, it said, adding in such cases, presenting 'consent' as a defence only victimises the child, shifts the blame onto them, and undermines the very object of POCSO to protect children from exploitation regardless of whether they were 'willing'. The existing age of consent ought to be retained in order to give full effect to the legislative intent, protect the bodily integrity of children, and uphold the constitutional and statutory safeguards accorded to them, it said. 'The Supreme Court along with high courts across the country have always maintained the sanctity of legal age of consent as 18 years of age. This statutory yardstick has been upheld on numerous occasions, keeping in view the legislative intent and the pre-eminent constitutional mandate of protecting young children,' it said. Earlier, amicus curiae and senior advocate Indira Jaising had urged the bench to read down the statutory age of consent from 18 to 16 years. Jaising, who is assisting the top court in the case, then said the current law criminalises consensual romantic relationships among adolescents and violates their constitutional rights.

Top Court Criticises Allahabad High Court For Ignoring Settled Law On Sentence Suspension
Top Court Criticises Allahabad High Court For Ignoring Settled Law On Sentence Suspension

NDTV

time16 hours ago

  • NDTV

Top Court Criticises Allahabad High Court For Ignoring Settled Law On Sentence Suspension

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has once again expressed its displeasure with an order of the Allahabad High Court for failing to apply settled legal principles while rejecting a plea for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction. The observations from the top court came days after it pulled up an Allahabad High Court judge for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case. In an unprecedented order, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan on August 4 stripped criminal matters of the roster of a Allahabad High Court judge "till he demits office" after he "erroneously" upheld summons of criminal nature in a civil dispute. The same bench came hard on the high court decision in another case. "The impugned Order is one more from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad with which we are disappointed," it said, adding that this plea arose from an order passed by the High Court on May 29, in a criminal appeal by which the high court declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the trial court. "We are once again constrained to observe that such errors creep in at the level of the High Court and only because the wellsettled principles of law on the subject are not applied correctly. "It is very important to first look into the subject-matter. Thereafter the court should look into the issue involved. In the last the court should look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply the correct principles of law," Justice Pardiwala said in an order on August 6. The apex court observed that the High Court's order was legally flawed and demonstrated a disregard for established jurisprudence. It was hearing an appeal filed by a convict who had been sentenced to four years of rigorous imprisonment under various provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The convict had approached the high court with an application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking suspension of his sentence. However, the high court rejected the plea solely on the ground that the offence was "heinous", without evaluating the request in light of the settled law. Setting aside the high court's order, bench cited a landmark judgment which mandates that appellate courts should adopt a liberal approach in suspending fixed-term sentences unless exceptional circumstances exist. Emphasizing the need for judicial clarity, the bench said, "It is very important to first look into the subject matter. Thereafter, the court should examine the issues involved, and only then consider the plea of the litigant before applying the correct principles of law." The apex court took particular issue with the high court's failure to analyze the application on legal grounds. "What the high court did was to reiterate the prosecution's case and the oral evidence, without engaging with the legal test for suspension of sentence in a fixed-term conviction," the bench observed. It has now remanded the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration, directing it to pass an appropriate order within 15 days. "The High Court shall keep in mind that the sentence is for a fixed term, that is four years and it is only if there are compelling circumstances indicating that release would not be in public interest, that suspension may be denied," the order clarified.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store