The Supreme Court-mandated Victim Compensation Fund is an excellent scheme for rehabilitating the victims of such heinous crimes as acid attacks, rape, sexual abuse, human trafficking and molestation. But herein lies the catch:
No claim made by the victims under sub-section (4) of the Section 357-A of the code shall be entertained six months after the date of commission of crime as per the government notification on the scheme.
Though provisions for appeal to condone delay in seeking compensation are in place, senior advocate Sudha Ramalingam told The Hindu that such a short cut-off period might unnecessarily jeopardise the prospects of victims getting assistance.
The Tamil Nadu government has been operating a victim assistance scheme even before the Supreme Court ordered the setting up of the fund. The State scheme covers dowry deaths, attempt to burn or murder owing to dowry problem and eve-teasing, too.
Delays occur at various stages of addressing crimes, be it the filing of the First Information Reports and charge sheets or court proceedings. During the course of interviews The Hindu conducted with lawyers, acid attack survivors, activists, and the families of the victims of sexual offences, concerns at delays came up again and again.
P.T. Rajan, a BSNL employee and father of a dowry death victim from Thirumullaivoyal, said that even over two years after the death of his daughter at her in-laws’ house, the police had not filed the charge sheet yet. She was set ablaze by her in-laws for not meeting her sister-in-law’s demand for gold bangles. “My son-in-law had forced her to drink acid a month before her death. I spent Rs. 10,000 on her treatment. But, at the end of the day, it is not the lack of compensation that hurts me so much as the lack of justice.”
D. Geetha, a Madurai-based lawyer fighting for women’s rights, recounted the story of Kavitha of North Chennai who underwent four surgeries after an acid attack six years ago. “She did not receive any financial assistance from the government. Though the government is often prompt in awarding compensation for the death of acid attack victims, it should prioritise funding for survivors of such attacks as they have to spend a lot on reconstructive surgeries.”
The most disturbing story was the one narrated by Rani, 48. Her husband had poured acid over her 20 years ago. To date, he is at large. “I make ends meet by tailoring. But the wounds of the past have not healed yet. I still suffer from fatigue and head aches and cannot work long hours like a normal, healthy person.”
Rani has lost hope that justice will ever be done. She echoes Mr. Rajan’s sentiment. “I don’t care for the money, but I want the culprit brought to books.”
