Under-utilisation of the Nirbhaya Fund reflects a governance deficit rather than a resource deficit. Discuss with reference to the Safe City Project and One Stop Centres.

The Nirbhaya Fund was set up after the 2012 Delhi gang-rape. By FY 2024-25, ₹7,712.85 crore had been allocated to it, but only about 76% had been used [1]. Money was available but went unspent. That points mainly to weak delivery machinery, not to a shortage of funds.

Why it is not a resource deficit

• The fund already pays for a wide range of components: ERSS-112, Women Helpline-181, Fast Track Special Courts, Anti-Human Trafficking Units and the Central Victim Compensation Fund [1].
• A Parliamentary Standing Committee found that ₹7,436 crore had been linked to 32 projects, yet only about ₹2,647 crore had been disbursed [2]. The money was stuck between approval and release.

Governance deficit: Safe City Project

• Narrow targeting: ₹2,919.55 crore was sanctioned for just eight metros [3]. Funds followed metro size, not where crime was concentrated.
• Slow execution: the project was launched in 2018 with a three-year tenure but had to be extended [4]. This shows weak project management, not a lack of money.
• Fragmented roles: MHA sanctions the projects [4], while "police" and "public order" are State subjects [5]. That split weakens accountability for results.

Governance deficit: One Stop Centres (OSCs)

• 812 OSCs now offer police help, medical aid, legal aid, counselling and shelter under one roof [1]. Each centre depends on several departments working together, and that convergence is the weak link, not funding.
• OSCs fall under Sambal, a sub-scheme of Mission Shakti [6]. They are mostly a response after the crime, so spending on them does not on its own make public spaces safer.

The other side

• The States' share of costs and their limited capacity, such as police vacancies and shortages of trained staff, are real resource constraints at the ground level [5].
• "76% utilised" measures money spent (an input), not how much safer women are (an outcome) [1].

Way forward

• Set up Cabinet Secretary-level oversight and ensure timely implementation, as the Standing Committee recommended [2].
• Tie the release of each instalment to outcome indicators, and select future Safe Cities by crime rate.

The shortfall therefore lies mainly in convergence, accountability and the flow of money from approval to spending. Fixing these would make the Nirbhaya Fund deliver on Article 15(3) and SDG 5 (gender equality), with public spaces that are actually safe for women.