Ensuring Integrity: MP High Court Links SC/ST Compensation to Witness Commitment

In a significant order aimed at preserving the integrity of criminal proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has stipulated that victims seeking compensation must now provide an undertaking to cooperate throughout the trial. Hon'ble Shri Justice Vishal Mishra, presiding at the Jabalpur bench, ruled that the disbursement of statutory compensation is now tethered to an affidavit confirming that the victim will neither turn hostile nor enter into a compromise with the accused.

A Quest for Justice and Support The petition was brought by a victim of an alleged offence registered at Police Station Khamariya, District Jabalpur, under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, alongside relevant sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. While a charge sheet was filed in December 2022, the state had yet to release the victim's entitled compensation under Clause 44(i) of the SC/ST Rules, 1995. The petitioner approached the court seeking a mandate for the release of 75% of the five-lakh rupee compensation amount.

The State’s Argument on Misuse The State’s representation vehemently opposed the unconditional release of funds. The counsel for the State highlighted a recurring pattern where victims initiate cases, receive financial aid from the public exchequer, and subsequently turn hostile or compromise with the accused during the trial stage. This, the State argued, undermines the rule of law and constitutes an improper use of public funds. The Court’s decision acknowledges this trend, noting that the objective of the Act is to support genuine victims, not to fund a process where the litigation is ultimately abandoned for a settlement.

Defining Legal Accountability The legal principle established here is one of conditional entitlement. The Court ruled that the petitioner must submit an affidavit to respondents No. 2 and 3, affirming they will not compromise or turn hostile. The ruling provides a safety net: if a victim fails to maintain their commitment to the prosecution, the compensation must be refunded to the state within 30 days of the trial court’s judgment. Failure to comply will grant the authorities the right to initiate recovery proceedings under the M.P.L.R.C.

Key Observations The judgment underscores the judiciary's concern regarding the potential misuse of the SC/ST Act's financial relief provisions:

  • "The statement of victim is recorded thereafter. The amount to the victim in the form of compensation under the Act is to be paid from public exchequer. The public exchequer cannot be misused for the purpose of compliance of provisions of Rules, 1995."
  • "Under these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the petitioner to submit an affidavit... to the effect that she will not enter into the compromise with the accused or will not turn hostile before the Trial Court ."
  • "If the victim turns hostile then the amount received in the form of compensation is required to be refunded back to the State Authorities within a period of 30 days from the date of judgment passed by the trial Court ."

Implications for the Future This decision, recently reported by LiveLaw [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 222], creates a new precedent where financial aid under special legislation is explicitly linked to the victim’s conduct during trial. By forcing this accountability as a condition precedent, the Court is attempting to ensure that cases under the SC/ST Act reach a logical legal conclusion rather than dissolving through compromise. Moving forward, trial courts have been directed to be vigilant and consider taking cognizance against victims who frustrate the judicial process by filing false or frivolous complaints after accepting state-provided aid.