The Delhi High Court has expressed concern over the misuse of victim compensation in certain sexual offence cases and issued guidelines to ensure its effective implementation.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that victims are often granted interim compensation upon registration of an FIR, but may later withdraw their allegations, enter into a compromise, or seek quashing of the FIR or related proceedings.
The Court observed that in such cases, the interim compensation already paid is often neither returned by the victim nor is any effective recovery mechanism initiated by the concerned Legal Services Authority.
It cautioned that allowing such compensation to remain unrecovered where allegations are later withdrawn or found to be false could lead to misuse of public funds and undermine the credibility and sustainability of schemes intended for genuine victims of sexual violence.
The Court observed that the Secretary of the DSLSA is not informed of orders quashing FIRs in cases under Section 376 of the IPC or relevant provisions of the POCSO Act, particularly when such quashing is based on settlement or compromise.
Consequently, the DSLSA is often unable to assess whether interim or final compensation granted under the Victim Compensation Scheme should be recovered in appropriate cases.
The Court directed that in sexual offence cases where victim compensation has been granted, the Trial Court must forward a copy of the order and relevant records to the DSLSA so that it may consider whether recovery proceedings are required. This direction applies in cases where the FIR or criminal proceedings are quashed on the basis of settlement or compromise, or where the victim turns hostile during trial and retracts her earlier allegations.
The Court further directed that all petitions seeking quashing of FIRs or criminal proceedings in sexual offence cases on the basis of compromise or settlement must mandatorily disclose whether the victim has received compensation under the Victim Compensation Scheme, along with relevant details. It noted that in the absence of clear guidelines, compensation is often not recovered in cases where FIRs are quashed on settlement or where the victim, after receiving interim compensation, turns hostile and completely retracts her statement.
Justice Sharma concluded that the directions aim to promote transparency, accountability, and effective implementation of victim compensation mechanisms, while protecting public funds and maintaining the credibility of schemes designed to support genuine victims of sexual violence.