Delhi High Court asks special courts to grant interim relief compensation to child victims without waiting for them to move an application; Posco Act

The Delhi High Court in the case Umesh v. State (and other connected matters) observed that Special Courts must, on their own, initiate action for grant of interim compensation to child victims at the earliest, without waiting for them for the same, to file an application.

The bench comprising of Justice Jasmeet Singh observed while dealing with a bunch of pleas wherein a predecessor bench had sought to streamline the process of supplying FIRs pertaining to commission of sexual offences to DSLSA and for granting interim compensation to the victims.

It was observed that the development came after the Court was apprised that when the applications are moved before the Special Court for interim compensation and before any effective order is passed in the same, it takes two to three hearings.

Further, the court ordered that the Special Court need not wait for an application to be filed by a child victim before passing an order for interim compensation and for grant of interim compensation at the earliest, must be on its own initiate action.

It was also directed by the court that the Special Courts shall inform the victims about their right to move application under Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme when the case comes up for hearing before them. The court states that Rule 9(1) of POCSO which provides that Special Court may, in appropriate cases, on its own or on an application filed by or on behalf of the child, pass an order for interim compensation to meet the needs of the child for rehabilitation or relief at any stage after the FIR is being registered and if any, such interim compensation is adjustable against the final compensation.

In the present case, the court added that the Special Court must rely on the preliminary assessment report which is to be filed within 24 hours of the registration of the FIR.

The court noted that there are only 5,503 pending cases, as a corollary, 81,902 must have been disposed of and there is no data with regard to the fact of those 81,902 cases, whether any compensation has been paid.

In the matter, the status report to be filled be forwarded to District Judges and sought a further status report within four weeks and with a request to the Judges to give their views within a period of two weeks, the court added.