Allahabad HC orders Dalit women to return ₹4.5 lakh compensation after they retract their complaints

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday (November 6, 2025) ordered three Dalit women to return the ₹4.5 lakh compensation they had collectively received from the Uttar Pradesh government after they retracted their statements recorded before a magistrate.

A Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav also slapped a ₹5 lakh fine on the 19 men, accused of assaulting the women, for manipulating the victims.

The matter pertains to a complaint filed by a woman and her two daughters-in-law against 19 upper-caste men, for trespassing, assault, criminal intimidation and offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act at Yamunapar police station in Prayagraj district in July last year.

The matter is currently at the trial stage in a local court, which had summoned the accused persons. The accused later approached the HC seeking quashing of the cognisance and summoning orders from the trial court.

During a hearing earlier this month, the complainant told the court she never lodged any complaint with the police and claimed that her thumb impressions were taken on a blank paper.

However, the lawyer representing the State submitted that the complainant and her daughters-in-law’s medical reports and statements recorded before the magistrate, in which they unequivocally supported the prosecution. The court was also informed that each woman received ₹1.5 lakh compensation from the government.

“The Court finds it deeply disturbing that the complainant now denies having filed the FIR, despite having made statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. affirming the allegations and having availed of substantial monetary compensation under the statutory scheme meant for genuine victims of atrocities,” the court said, ordering the women to return the compensation.

Justice Yadav noted that the women’s conduct prima facie reflects a “serious abuse of the process of law” and “a gross misuse of the benevolent provisions of the SC/ST Act”.

Terming the sequence of events as “deliberate attempt to manipulate the criminal justice process after wrongfully obtaining public funds, thereby committing a fraud upon the State”, the court also imposed a ₹5 lakh cost on the appellants to deter recurrence of such manipulative conduct.