The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government, the Ministry of Law and Justice, and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) on a writ petition seeking various measures for child victims of crime under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
The Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma recently passed the order on a plea seeking implementation of the child victim compensation scheme for victims of crime, including victims of sexual abuse, and addressing their distinct psychological, emotional, educational and financial needs.
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Pragyan Pradip Sharma submitted that pursuant to the now disposed of matter, In Re: Alarming rise in the number of report child rape incidents, this Court’s Registry drew up a scheme termed as ‘Compensation, Rehabilitation, Welfare and Education of POCSO victims, 2019’.
The Union government was supposed to respond to the draft scheme, formalise it and implement it across the States. However, nothing happened after that. Various States were yet to compensate the child victims in line with the NALSA Scheme, 2018, he noted.
The Counsel said in the Nipun Saxena matter, it was seen that the NALSA scheme did not take care of the child. As an interregnum measure, the NALSA scheme was applied in the case and it was said that the latest formal scheme would be implemented.
The Bench asked whether any scheme under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) or the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) applied to child victims.
Advocate Sharma said that no scheme applied to the child victims.
The Apex Court further asked whether the petitioners in this case (12 child victims), had received compensation or not.
The Counsel said not a penny was given to the petitioners, which included children in the age group of 4-8 years and child rape victims.
Advocate Sharma apprised the Bench that they had written several representations to the States, but to no avail. He prayed for the Court’s intervention, saying that some amount of monitoring was required to streamline the process.
The Bench stopped short of issuing notice to the States, including the State of Uttar Pradesh, which was impleaded by the petitioner, and listed the matter for further hearing on August 18.