More than one lakh people lost their lives in Maharashtra due to Corona first and second wave while more than three lakh may have lost nationwide. The victims include people from all classes, creeds or races and as rich and affluent class people like doctors, advocates and professors, government officials and big traders, businessmen died of deadly virus as well as people from lower middle class or poor class also lost their lives. Thousands of families suddenly transferred from rich to the poor or middle class and middle-class families went into the ditch of poverty. It is not a wonder that, in the queues of free ration or Shiv Bhojan Thali in Maharashtra, anyone can see affluent class people standing and this is not an exaggeration. In such a situation, the Supreme Court has given a big relief for the victim's dependents. The SC has given the verdict in clear terms that, it is the centre’s responsibility and constitutional duty to provide ex gratia amount to family members who have become destitute due to the death of their breadwinner member. It has rejected the centre’s contention that, it is not obligatory to provide such relief to victim’s dependents. SC has clearly said in its verdict that, section twelve of the constitution makes centre obligatory to provide ex gratia payment. This decision has come as a huge relief for lakhs of poor families struggling to survive due to the death of the lone breadwinner.  The SC has fixed the amount as a maximum of four lakhs or less than that amount.  This becomes more important when the entire country has seen a large number of people died of Coronavirus and no relief coming from any government or any other institution. As the insurance companies are struggling with the flood of files for compensation, their financial capacity is almost diminished to make payment of insurance claims. So the relatives of victims are only having skirmishes with the insurance officials. In this situation, SC decision has come to their rescue. If a patient survived or relatives of a dead patient of Corona claims mediclaim from the private insurance company, the rule is that he can’t claim government help. This rule should also be taken into consideration by SC and it should give its directions to governments to change it. Now, this verdict has raised some questions. Though the government is committed to providing relief to relatives of victims of Corona, there are people who have died or suffering from black fungus, white or yellow fungus. Whether government should provide relief to these people is also a contentious point, for which SC has differed the ruling.  But, for one thing, we should congratulate SC for it has told the centre in clear terms what is its constitutional duty and obligation. The Centre had contended that, for the present, it is busy in controlling pandemic and its preference in expenses is towards reducing the number of patients. But, SC has ruled that, in the name of controlling pandemics, the government can avoid its duty to provide relief to victims of Corona. Though Sc ruling will have a long term impact on relief and rehabilitation policy, there are two sides of the relief measures. Government officials will try to maximum hide the Covid-19 deaths by attributing to other reasons, the people also will try to claim death by Corona even if the patient may have died of other diseases. Both are illegal and its centre’s duty to ensure the relief is reaching real needy people. In our country, the benefits of every scheme are gone to fake people and the real needy remain deprived. The farmers’ loan waiver scheme is the best example. As now digital technology is available, the government should take precautions that the relief amount will go in the right hands.