Caught between two laws

Nabrangpur, Odisha: On January 9, inside the District Magistrate’s office in Nabarangpur, an eight-year-old girl sat quietly beside her mother as officials completed paperwork approving Rs 6 lakh in victim compensation. More than three years after she was sexually assaulted, the child finally received the amount meant to support her rehabilitation.

Too young to understand the legal process behind it, she turned to her mother and said, “Please give me the money that nani gave me. I only want to buy chocolates.” In 2024, a special POCSO court had sentenced the accused to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. But while the conviction came through, the compensation remained stuck for over a year.

For the child’s parents, daily wage labourers, the delay was both confusing and exhausting. “We thought once the court gave the judgment, everything was over,” said her mother, Namita (name changed). “But we were told the money could not be released immediately because of some rule. We did not understand what mistake we had made.”

Conviction without compensation

The assault took place on August 10, 2022, when the child was five years old. She was allegedly lured by a neighbour while her parents were away at work. An FIR was registered under the Indian Penal Code, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act. According to Special Public Prosecutor SN Swain, the decision to invoke the SC/ST Act is taken by the investigating officer at the FIR and chargesheet stage, not by the prosecutor.

“The Act is applied where the facts are seen to attract its provisions, alongside other laws,” he said. “But that does not necessarily mean conviction under all sections.”

In this case, the accused was ultimately convicted under the POCSO Act but acquitted of the SC/ST charge. In May 2024, the POCSO court sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and recommended Rs 6 lakh as compensation under the state’s victim compensation scheme. But the money did not reach the family for more than a year.

The child’s father recalled repeated visits to government offices. “Every time we went, they said there was a technical issue. We are poor people. We do not understand these laws. We only knew our daughter needed help.”

Two laws

According to Swain, the delay stemmed from the overlap of legal frameworks. Because the case was initially registered under both the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act, authorities were unclear about which mechanism should govern compensation. “When there is an overlap between special laws, the Collector becomes the authority to decide compensation,” Swain said. “This administrative confusion often slows down the process. But compensation is a legal entitlement. It should not depend on technical interpretation.” had initially been registered under the SC/ST Act.

It was only after intervention by South Orissa Voluntary Action, a local organisation, that the family filed an appeal before the State Legal Services Authority. In January 2026, the compensation was finally approved.

The delay stemmed from overlapping legal provisions governing victim compensation. Under Section 33(8) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Rule 7 of the POCSO Rules, 2020, compensation is awarded based on court recommendations through the District Legal Services Authority under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

However, in cases registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, compensation is governed by Rule 12(4) of the SC/ST Rules, 1995 (as amended in 2016), which places responsibility on the District Magistrate. In the absence of clear operational guidance for cases involving both laws, the overlap can delay compensation. The delay added to the family’s financial and emotional burden.

The Nabarangpur district court is around 22 km from their village. Each visit cost them around Rs 700, including transport and other expenses. Over the course of the case, the family made around 20 visits.

“For us, even one day’s wage matters,” the father said. “I had to borrow money while pursuing the case.” The family said the police acted promptly when they filed the complaint at Tentulikhunti police station, and they did not face harassment during the investigation. But navigating the legal process was difficult.

“We felt lost,” the mother said. “Only later, when SOVA helped us, we understood what to do.” After the compensation was approved, Rs 4.8 lakh was placed in a fixed deposit for five years, while Rs 1.2 lakh was released for immediate use. The parents said they plan to use the money for their daughter’s education and care.

The compensation has brought some relief, but the impact of the case continues. The family said they still face stigma in the village and are considering relocating to Nabarangpur town. They are also exploring the option of placing the child in a hostel.

Gaps in support system

The family’s experience also highlights gaps in institutional support. According to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the Child Welfare Committee is expected to appoint a support person, ensure rehabilitation and facilitate access to compensation. But in practice, these safeguards are not always implemented.

“Ideally, there should be continuous monitoring of the child’s rehabilitation,” said Dr Benudhara Senapati of Ruchika Social Service Organisation. “But in reality, follow-up is limited.” He said compensation is often deposited in a bank account operated by the guardian, and there is little structured monitoring of how it is used. “Families generally use it for education, medical care or basic needs,” he said. “But there is no system to ensure it is consistently used for the child’s rehabilitation.” The family said no support person was appointed by the Child Welfare Committee during the case. Officials of the District Child Protection Unit and the Child Welfare Committee in Nabarangpur did not respond to queries.

The family added that they have not applied for financial assistance from the Child Welfare Committee and are currently relying on support from SOVA, particularly counsellor Uma Satnami.

Systemic issue

Data from the National Legal Services Authority shows that Odisha has recorded more than 2,000 pending victim compensation applications annually over the past five years. In 2022-23, pending cases peaked at 2,674. Even in 2023-24, more than 2,300 applications remained pending. While the data does not separately classify POCSO cases, child sexual assault cases form a significant portion of compensation claims filed under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. “Compensation is not charity… it is a statutory right,” said public prosecutor Rajib Sasmal. “When survivors are forced to wait for years, it only prolongs their trauma.”

At the same time, Odisha continues to report high levels of crimes against children. According to NCRB data, the state recorded 8,577 crimes against children in 2023, up from 8,240 in 2022. Swain said that such delays reflect deeper issues in coordination between institutions. Drawing on his experience at the Nabarangpur POCSO court, he said he has rarely seen the Child Welfare Committee actively intervene in cases. “In all these years, no representative from the CWC has approached me regarding any case,” he said.

He added that the overlap of legal frameworks can create avoidable delays. “In this case, the SC/ST Act was invoked at the investigation stage, but the conviction was under POCSO,” he said. “This created confusion over which authority should process compensation.” For the child and her family, the money has finally come.

But her mother says no amount can erase what happened.

“We only want our daughter to study well and forget this,” she said. “We don’t want any other family to run from office to office like we did.”

(Prativa Ghosh is a freelance journalist and a member of 101Reporters.) 

This story has been produced by 101Reporters, an independent news agency with a network of 3,000+ freelance journalists across the country, in collaboration with Crime & Punishment, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.