The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed a victim seeking compensation under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, to file an affidavit assuring that she will not turn hostile or enter into a compromise with the accused before additional compensation is released.
Justice Vishal Mishra passed the order while hearing a petition filed by a victim who sought release of 75% of the compensation amount available under the statutory scheme.
Background of the Case
According to the petition, an FIR was registered in September 2022 at Khamariya Police Station in Jabalpur for offences under the Indian Penal Code and provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed before the trial court in December 2022.
The petitioner, who belongs to a Scheduled Tribe community, argued that under Clause 44(i) of the 1995 Rules, she was entitled to compensation of ₹5 lakh. She claimed that despite the filing of the chargesheet, only ₹75,000 had been paid and the remaining eligible amount had not been released.
During the hearing, the State submitted that in several cases victims receive compensation and later either enter into settlements or do not support the prosecution during trial. The State argued that compensation is paid from public funds and safeguards are necessary.
Accepting this concern, the Court observed that compensation under the Rules is funded from the public exchequer and “the public exchequer cannot be misused for the purpose of compliance of provisions of Rules, 1995.”
The bench directed the petitioner to submit an affidavit stating that she would not compromise with the accused, would not turn hostile, and would contest the criminal case initiated on her complaint.
The Court ordered that no further compensation be disbursed until such an affidavit is filed. If the affidavit is submitted within 15 days, the authorities must consider the compensation claim and take a decision within 30 days thereafter.
The Court further directed that if the victim later turns hostile, the compensation received would have to be refunded to the State, failing which recovery proceedings may be initiated in accordance with law.
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Victim v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Case Number: W.P. No. 13567 of 2026
Judge: Justice Vishal Mishra
Decision Date: June 18, 2026
