The Punjab and Haryana High Court's recent ruling highlighted the exploitation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and its compensation rules by mischievous elements. This misuse has undermined the intended compensatory provisions meant for genuine victims of atrocities.

Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj emphasized the necessity of curbing any fraudulent attempts to exploit the provisions of the statute. He highlighted the importance of preventing misrepresentation of facts and false accusations aimed at obtaining undue benefits under the law.

In this case, the ruling was delivered concerning a petitioner, a woman, and her nephew, who initially claimed to be eyewitnesses to her son's murder, allegedly by individuals belonging to a dominant caste. However, during their appearance as prosecution witnesses, both retracted from their original statement, specifically mentioning that the accused individuals on trial did not cause the injuries.

Justice Bhardwaj emphasized that the Act was established with the primary objective of preventing offenses and atrocities against members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Additionally, it aimed to facilitate the establishment of special courts for the swift resolution of such cases, along with ensuring the provision of relief and rehabilitation for the victims.

He noted that the crucial matter before the court was whether an individual could assert themselves as a victim of an atrocity solely based on a statement provided to the police under Section 154 or 161 of the CrPC. This observation specifically questioned the validity of such a claim, particularly when the individual had renounced or contradicted the same statement while testifying in a court of law.

Justice Bhardwaj highlighted that the fundamental criterion of being recognized as a 'victim' for utilizing the Act's provisions became questionable when the petitioner withdrew their initial statement. He stressed that the financial assistance outlined in the rules wasn't intended as a method to gain from public funds by filing cases known to the complainant as false.