The Supreme Court on Thursday took a tough stand against States reluctant to share information about the compensation paid to victims of rape under a Victim Compensation Scheme devised under a 2009 law introduced by the Centre. The court also accused the Centre of offering “lip service” to victims of such crimes by not making funds under Nirbhaya Fund available to States.
Dealing with a bunch of PIls filed in the aftermath of the horrendous Nirbhaya gang rape incident of 2012, where a paramedical student was raped in a moving bus in Delhi, the Vacation Bench of Justices Prafulla C Pant and Dhananjay Y Chandrachud issued notice to all States and Union Territories seeking information on whether any compensation scheme existed for rape survivors following the introduction of law under Section 357A of Code of Criminal Procedure in 2009.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, who is the amicus curiae assisting the court in these matters gave an indication of how “abysmal” was the performance by States and UTs under Section 357A. She shared information given by State/UT Governments in response to an RTI query by one of the PIl petitioners Nipun Saxena, who is a lawyer, on whether States have framed a scheme to compensate victims of crime, and if so details of persons who benefited from the compensation.
Information made available till February 2013 indicated that 25 out of 29 States had notified a scheme under Section 357A but only eight people had benefited in these four years (2009-2013). The Bench was compelled to seek latest figures from States within six weeks.
Jaising pointed out that the situation is made worse by lack of uniformity in the compensation amounts handed over by States. While Goa has a policy to award Rs10 lakh compensation, several States offer a pittance of Rs20,000. No part of this amount is available as an interim measure for victims, who are made to wait for compensation on the decision by court. Most States have not allocated any budget for payment under the scheme even as the Centrally-maintained Nirbhaya Fund claims to be plush with Rs2,000 crore.
The Bench said, “Merely having so much money in Nirbhaya Fund is not enough. The Government must ensure it gets distributed to every district or else it amounts to offering mere lip service.”
Jaising said that a one stop crisis centre was envisaged by the Women and Child Development Ministry following the Nirbhaya incident in each of the over 680 districts. As on date, only 14 exist. She raised the issue of app-based cab aggregators, who operate without any registration in State nor do they have a panic button for any woman to alert an emergency situation. This despite several complaints been reported against cab drivers for indulging in crimes of sexual assault and molestation against women passengers.
The Bench asked the Centre to respond to the five suggestions made by Jaising and propose guidelines to serve as a guide for States to enable a safe environment for women.