The Indian criminal justice system aims not only to punish offenders but also to provide adequate reparation and rehabilitation to victims of crime. Recognizing the victim's suffering and ensuring their restitution has become an integral part of criminal jurisprudence in India.
Basic Concept of Victim Reparation
"Reparation" refers to compensation or restitution provided to victims who have suffered harm, injury, or loss due to criminal acts. It serves dual purposes:
-
Redressing the harm suffered by victims.
-
Reinforcing the offender's accountability towards society and the victim.
Victims include individuals directly harmed by a crime, their dependents, or even those harmed while assisting victims or preventing victimization.
Statutory Provisions under Indian Law
The statutory framework for victim compensation in India primarily resides in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), specifically under Sections 357, 357A, and related provisions:
Section 357 CrPC: Compensation by Offender
Section 357 empowers criminal courts (trial or appellate) to award compensation directly payable by the offender upon conviction. It provides two distinct scenarios:
-
Section 357(1): When a fine forms part of the sentence imposed on the offender, courts may order that fine (or part thereof) be paid to the victim for:
-
Expenses incurred during prosecution.
-
Loss or injury caused due to the offence.
-
-
Section 357(3): Even when no fine is imposed as part of the sentence, courts retain discretionary power to award compensation considering the nature of injury and loss suffered by the victim.
The Supreme Court clarified this distinction in Mangi Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, holding that under Section 357(1), imposing a fine is mandatory for awarding compensation; whereas under Section 357(3), compensation can be awarded even without imposing a fine1.
Factors Considered by Courts under Section 357:
-
Nature and gravity of injury inflicted.
-
Offender's ability and capacity to pay compensation.
-
Actual loss or injury suffered by victims.
-
Expenses incurred during litigation.
Limitations:
-
Compensation under Section 357 can only be granted upon conviction. If the accused is acquitted or discharged, no compensation can be awarded under this section.
Landmark Judgment: Hari Kishan & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh (1988)
In Hari Kishan & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh (AIR 1988 SC 2127), the Supreme Court emphasized that courts must proactively consider awarding compensation to victims. In this landmark judgment, the Apex Court awarded Rs.50,000 as compensation to a victim whose speech was impaired due to injuries inflicted by offenders. The court underscored that awarding compensation should form part of sentencing policy, highlighting its rehabilitative and restorative purpose.
Landmark Judgment: Swaran Singh v. State of Punjab (2004)
In Swarn Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court outlined essential considerations while awarding compensation:
-
Determining if the case merits awarding compensation.
-
Assessing the accused's financial capacity to pay compensation.
Compensation through State Intervention: Section 357A CrPC
Recognizing limitations in Section 357, Section 357A was introduced through an amendment in CrPC in 2009. It mandates state governments to establish a Victim Compensation Scheme administered by District Legal Services Authorities (DLSA) or State Legal Services Authorities (SLSA). This provision ensures that victims receive adequate relief even when offenders are untraceable, acquitted, discharged, or financially incapable.
Under Section 357A:
-
Courts may recommend state-funded compensation if existing relief under Section 357 is insufficient.
-
Victims or dependents may directly apply for state-funded compensation through District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) or State Legal Services Authority (SLSA).
Additional Statutory Provisions for Victim Compensation:
Apart from Sections 357 and 357A CrPC, other relevant provisions include:
-
Section 358 CrPC: Compensation for wrongful arrest.
-
Section 359: Costs awarded in non-cognizable cases.
-
Section 250: Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause.
Additionally, special statutes like:
-
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
-
Probation of Offenders Act,1958
-
Motor Vehicles Act,1988
also contain specific provisions mandating compensatory relief for victims.
Interim Relief and Immediate Medical Assistance
Recognizing immediate needs post-crime incidents, provisions mandate prompt interim relief and medical aid:
-
Immediate interim assistance can be granted by District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) within seven days after receiving notice about the crime.
-
Hospitals must provide free immediate medical treatment in specified offences like rape (IPC Sections 376 and related sections).
Conclusion
The statutory framework under Indian law clearly recognizes victim reparation as integral to criminal justice administration. Judicial interpretations have consistently reinforced victim-centric approaches emphasizing proactive judicial discretion in awarding adequate compensation. Landmark judgments like Hari Kishan & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh and Swarn Singh v. State of Punjab underscore judicial sensitivity towards victim rehabilitation and offender accountability through monetary reparations. These provisions collectively aim at achieving restorative justice—addressing both victim's rights and offender accountability within India's criminal jurisprudence framework.
No comments:
Post a Comment