It is a mandatory duty of criminal court to apply its mind to question of awarding compensation in every criminal case,

Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 6 SCC 770
Criminal Law
Victimology
Award of compensation to victim(s) of crime or their dependants under S. 357 CrPC - Mandatory duty of criminal court
to apply its mind to question of awarding compensation in every case - Power is not ancillary to other sentences but in
addition thereto - Use of word may in S. 357, held, does not mean that court need not consider applicability of S. 357 in
every criminal case - S. 357 CrPC confers power coupled with duty on court to mandatorily apply its mind to question of
awarding compensation in every criminal case -
Court must also disclose that it has applied its mind to such question by
recording reasons for awarding/refusing grant of compensation - Power given to courts under S. 357 is intended to
reassure victim that he/she is not forgotten in criminal justice system - Very object of S. 357 would be defeated if courts
choose to ignore S. 357 and do not apply their mind to question of compensation - Hence, S. 357 is to be read as
imposing a mandatory duty on court to apply its mind to question of awarding compensation in every case - Courts
directed to remain careful in future as to their mandatory duty under S. 357 CrPC - Copy of order directed to be
forwarded to Registrars General of all High Courts for its circulation amongst Judges handling criminal trials and hearing
criminal appeals, (2013) 6 SCC 770-A
Criminal Law
Victimology
Award of compensation to victim(s) of crime or their dependants under S. 357 CrPC - Factors to be considered -
Capacity of accused to pay - Enquiry in respect of - When warranted - Held, enquiry albeit summary in nature needs to
be conducted to determine paying capacity of offender unless facts as emerging in course of trial are so clear that court
considers it unnecessary to do so - Enquiry can precede an order on sentence to enable court to take a view, both on
question of sentence and compensation payable to victim or his/her family, (2013) 6 SCC 770-B
Criminal Law
Victimology
Compensation to victims of crime - Approach - Shift from retribution to restitution of victims - Historical perspective of
concept of restitution, traced - Development of law in many countries across the world providing for restitution of victims
by criminal courts that was earlier in domain of civil courts - Recognition of rights of victims by UN General Assembly -
Introduction of S. 357 in CrPC, 1973 for payment of compensation to victims of crime - Introduction of S. 357-A vide Act 5
of 2009 to further strengthen victim's rehabilitation - Failure of Indian courts in recognising such rights and giving effect to
the provisions of S. 357, deprecated - Scope of court's power and duty under S. 357, explained - Held, it is a mandatory
duty of criminal court to apply its mind to the question of awarding compensation in every criminal case, 
S. 302 or S. 304 Pt. II [S. 300 Exception 4] - Murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Determination of -
Nature of injury, weapon used, and part of body on which injury inflicted - Inference from - Applicability of S. 300
Exception 4 - Sudden quarrel ensuing over barking of dog - Appellant angered by barking of dog at him started beating
the dog with iron rod that he was carrying - Deceased, owner of dog objected to the beating and the same led to scuffle
between parties - Appellant hit the deceased with iron rod on head which caused injuries which proved to be fatal four
days later - No premeditation - No prior enmity or motive to commit the offence - No lethal weapon used - No second
blow/injury given once deceased collapsed to the ground - No act committed in unusual or cruel manner - Further, use of
words by appellant that if deceased did not keep quiet he too would be beaten like a dog indicated that intention was only
to beat up deceased and not to kill him - Benefit of Exception 4 to S. 300, held, available to appellant - Conviction by
lower courts under S. 302 and sentence of RI for life altered to one under S. 304 Pt. II and sentence of 5 yrs' RI, 

Print Page