An Allahabad High Court order has raised questions over the possible misuse of financial relief provided under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act after a Jhansi-based advocate and his family received more than Rs 23 lakh across multiple cases.
The state government told the court that advocate Santosh Kumar Dohrey and members of his family had collectively received Rs 23,36,250 as relief or financial assistance under the SC-ST Act rules and related schemes. It also informed the court that around 10 to 12 more cases involving Dohrey or his family members were awaiting consideration for additional relief.
The High Court stressed that the repeated filing of cases and receipt of compensation did not, by themselves, prove wrongdoing. However, Justice Santosh Rai said the scale and frequency of the claims were significant enough to warrant an investigation into whether the compensation system had been misused.
The matter came before the High Court after Dohrey and other appellants challenged what they said was inadequate payment in two cases registered in Jhansi in 2020. Investigating officers had recommended Rs 2 lakh in relief for each victim. The claimants argued that Rs 1.5 lakh per person should have been released after the charge sheet was filed, but only Rs 75,000 each had been paid.
A lower court's Special Judge rejected their applications for the remaining amount, prompting the appeal before the High Court. During the proceedings, however, the Uttar Pradesh government submitted details of the family's earlier compensation claims and payments.
The financial assistance provided under the SC-ST Act is not a penalty imposed on an accused person. It is government-funded relief intended to provide immediate assistance and rehabilitation to victims belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who face offences covered under the law.
Rule 12 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules specifies minimum relief for different offences. Depending on the offence, payments can range from Rs 85,000 to Rs 8.25 lakh and may be released in stages. In the Jhansi cases, for example, the recommended Rs 2 lakh per victim was to be paid in three stages, with 25 per cent at the registration of the FIR, 50 per cent after the charge sheet was filed and the remaining 25 per cent after conviction.
The scheme is implemented by state governments, with financial assistance also provided by the Centre under a Centrally Sponsored Scheme. Central assistance includes expenditure on relief and rehabilitation of victims and their dependants.
Government data show that 99,216 people across India received relief under the scheme in 2024-25, with Uttar Pradesh accounting for 20,074 beneficiaries. The state recorded 19,240 beneficiaries in 2023-24 and 23,828 in 2022-23.
After a case is registered, the District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate or another authorised Executive Magistrate is responsible for arranging relief. The district administration and police assess the circumstances, losses and rehabilitation requirements before the assistance is provided.
The Allahabad High Court has now directed the District Magistrate of Jhansi, in coordination with the Senior Superintendent of Police, to conduct a fair and time-bound investigation into the cases involving Dohrey and his family and the relief received or claimed.
The inquiry must examine whether provisions intended to assist genuine victims were misused. It has to be completed within three months of the certified copy of the court's order being submitted. If wrongdoing by claimants or officials involved in processing or approving the payments is established, the state has been directed to take action according to law.
The court has also ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to conduct a wider investigation across the state into the manner in which SC-ST Act compensation is claimed and distributed. Particular attention has been sought in cases involving repeated claims by the same individuals or members of the same family.
The state has been directed to consider establishing stronger regulatory and supervisory mechanisms in every district and to examine whether adequate verification is carried out before public funds are released. Special SC/ST courts have also been asked to remain alert to potential misuse while ensuring that genuine victims continue to receive their lawful benefits.
At the same time, the High Court provided relief to the appellants on their original compensation dispute. It held that the Special Judge had failed to properly consider the provisions governing payment of relief. The court noted that Rule 12(7) provides a judicial mechanism to address compensation that is delayed, inadequate or unfairly reduced. The two applications were therefore sent back for fresh consideration.
The Jhansi case is not the first instance in which courts have raised concerns about potential misuse of SC-ST Act compensation provisions. Courts in Uttar Pradesh and other states have previously dealt with cases involving allegations of repeated complaints and government financial assistance.
In one earlier Uttar Pradesh case, the Allahabad High Court ordered recovery of Rs 4.5 lakh after finding serious abuse of the legal process involving compensation claimed in a case with multiple accused. In another case, the court took note of a family that had filed seven cases and received Rs 4.83 lakh in state compensation, with an investigating officer raising concerns about repeated claims for financial assistance.
The Karnataka High Court has also dealt with a case involving multiple complaints. In a 2023 matter, a complainant had registered three cases with similar allegations within about a year and received Rs 3.5 lakh in government assistance. The court ordered recovery of Rs 1.5 lakh while dealing with one of the cases.
However, the Jhansi matter does not establish that Dohrey or his family fraudulently obtained the Rs 23 lakh. The Allahabad High Court has ordered an investigation to determine whether the pattern of claims involved any misuse.
What began as a dispute over an allegedly unpaid Rs 75,000 has therefore expanded into a wider examination of the system used to distribute SC-ST Act relief across Uttar Pradesh. The court's broader inquiry is aimed at identifying possible misuse while ensuring that stronger scrutiny does not prevent genuine victims of caste-based atrocities from receiving the financial assistance provided to them under the law.
Conversation
Be kind and stay on topic. Comments are moderated; abuse, spam and personal attacks are removed. Report a problem