Back
2024 Supreme(Del) 928
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
Balbir Meena - Petitioner
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 258 of 2021
Decided On : 27-11-2024
For the Petitioner: Dr. Akash Tandon and Dr. Shivam Bajaj.
For the Respondent:Ms. Harshita Nathrani, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Compensation under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is contingent upon ongoing legal proceedings; a settlement with the accused nullifies the basis for compensation.
Headnote:
(A) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(1)
(C), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(ii) - Compensation - Petitioner challenged the sanction of INR 10,000/- as inadequate under the SC/ST (POA) Rules, 1995 - Court found that the FIR was quashed due to amicable settlement, nullifying the basis for compensation - The court emphasized that compensation is contingent upon prosecution and active participation in legal proceedings. (Paras 10-14)
(B) Compensation Mechanism - The court ruled that when a victim settles with the accused, the foundational premise for awarding compensation ceases to exist, and any compensation received must be returned to the State. (Paras 23-27)
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner sought compensation under the SC/ST (POA) Act after an FIR was registered for atrocities. The compensation was sanctioned but deemed inadequate by the Petitioner, leading to the current petition.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Respondents' decision to award INR 10,000/- based on the factual background and previous settlements, finding no reason to increase the compensation.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Petitioner was entitled to increased compensation after the FIR was quashed due to a settlement with the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that compensation under the SC/ST (POA) Act is linked to ongoing legal proceedings, and a settlement negates the basis for such compensation.
Result: The petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev Narula, J.
CM APPL. 69106/2024(u/S 151 of CPC seeking early hearing)
1. For the grounds and reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. With the consent of parties, the main petition is called on board today itself and heard finally.
2. Disposed of.
W.P.(C) 258/2021
3. The Petitioner impugns order dated 21st August, 2020, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Dwarka)- Respondent No.3, sanctioning an amount of INR 10,000/- out of INR 1 lakh as compensation as per the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, [(“the Rules”)] to the Petitioner as a victim in relation to FIR no. 337/2019.
4. The brief background of the case leading to the filing of the instant petition is as follows :
(i) On a complaint filed by Petitioner on 23rd August, 2019, an FIR bearing no. 337/2019 was registered under Sections 3(1)(C), 3(1)(r),3(1)(s), 3(2)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, [“SC and ST (POA) Act”] in police station Dwarka North.
(ii) As per the Rules, the victims who have faced atrocities from any person who is not a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe are entitled to compensation. In accordance with the said rules, on 26th August, 2019, Petitioner filed an application with Respondent No. 3 seeking release of the compensation amount.
(iii) The chargesheet was filed in the aforenoted FIR on 15th October, 2019 before the concerned Court.
(iv) Subsequently, the Petitioner sent a letter to the ACP, Dwarka District, requesting the release of the compensation amount in accordance with the law. Although the ACP, Dwarka District, issued a communication on 27th November, 2019 to Respondent No. 3, providing details related to the FIR to assist the Respondents in offering relief under the SC/ST (POA) Act, no action was taken. As a result, the Petitioner made a representation to the Divisional Commissioner, narrating the incident and the fact that he had not received the compensation amount. However, again, no action was taken. Since Respondents had not accepted Petitioner’s request, a writ petition bearing no. W.P.(C) 4110/2020 was filed before this Court, which was disposed of on 10th July, 2020 with following directions:
“5. Considering the fact that the FIR is stated to be registered and the charge sheet is stated to have been filed, the authorities shall proceed in accordance with law after verifying the said facts. The decision on release of compensation shall be taken by the authorities within a period of six weeks.
6. The petition is disposed of with the above directions. However, if the grievance of the Petitioner is not redressed within the prescribed period of six weeks, the Petitioner is permitted to approach this Court by filing an application in this case. All pending applications are also disposed of.”
5. In compliance of the aforenoted order, Respondent No. 3 has passed the impugned order dated 21st August, 2020, which reads as follows :
“SANCTION ORDER
Sanction of District Magistrate, Distt. South-West/Head of Department is accorded and conveyed for incurring an expenditure worth Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand Only), out of Rs.1,00,000/-, on account of payment of compensation as per the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 to the victim i.e. Sh. Balbir Singh R/o Plot No. 220, Phase-II, Sector-13, Dwarka, Delhi in the FIR No. 337/2019.
The Sanction has been accorded in exercise of powers delegated by the Finance Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. The expenditure incurred shall be debitable from the Head of Account ‘222501800730050 Welfare of SC/ST.’
Sd/
(CHANDRA SHEKHAR)
SDM (DWARKA)”
6. Aggrieved by the amount granted, the Petitioner filed an application being CM APPL. 32213/2020 seeking restoration of writ petition [W.P.(C) 4110/2020], on the ground that the compensation amount was not adequate. The said application was disposed of on 10th December, 2020, granting liberty to Peti
