Landmark Judgments On Victim Compensation Under Crpc
1. Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), AIR 2014 SC 2665
Background:
This case dealt with the compensation to a victim of assault and the scope of Section 357 of the CrPC which allows courts to order compensation.
Legal Issue:
Whether courts have the power to order compensation to victims directly in criminal cases, and the extent of this power under CrPC.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court emphasized that courts can and should order compensation to victims as part of criminal proceedings under Section 357. It held that compensation is a part of the punishment and a means to restore the dignity of victims. The court underscored the importance of victim-centric justice.
Significance:
This ruling reinforced that victim compensation is an integral part of the criminal justice system, making the courts active participants in ensuring victim rehabilitation.
2. Laxmi v. Union of India, AIR 2015 SC 2047
Background:
This was a landmark case following a brutal gang rape incident in Delhi, popularly known as the “Nirbhaya case.” The petition sought comprehensive measures including compensation to victims of sexual violence.
Legal Issue:
The need for effective victim compensation and rehabilitation schemes under the CrPC and the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court directed the government to set up a Victim Compensation Fund to provide immediate interim compensation to victims of crime, especially sexual violence. The court stressed speedy compensation and rehabilitation as a necessary component of justice.
Significance:
The judgment broadened the scope of victim compensation and institutionalized the concept of a Victim Compensation Fund, emphasizing timely relief.
3. Khatri v. State of Bihar, AIR 1981 SC 928
Background:
In this case, the petitioner sought compensation for loss and injuries suffered due to a criminal act.
Legal Issue:
Whether the criminal courts can order compensation and the criteria for such compensation under Section 357.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that courts have the discretion to award compensation to victims from the fine imposed on offenders or from state funds where available. It recognized victim compensation as a remedial measure under the criminal justice system.
Significance:
This case laid the foundation for recognizing compensation as a legal remedy within the framework of the CrPC.
4. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, AIR 1996 SC 1393
Background:
This case involved custodial death and the question of compensation to the victim’s family.
Legal Issue:
Compensation as a remedy for violation of fundamental rights in cases of custodial death.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court ruled that the State is liable to pay compensation to victims or their families when fundamental rights are violated, particularly in cases of custodial death or torture. The compensation awarded serves both as relief and as a deterrent to authorities.
Significance:
Though custodial death cases, this judgment solidified the principle that victim compensation is a fundamental right flowing from the right to life and dignity under Article 21.
5. Re: Rohit Sagar (2015) – Delhi High Court
Background:
This case addressed the timely disbursement of victim compensation and implementation of the scheme under Section 357A of the CrPC.
Legal Issue:
Ensuring prompt payment of compensation to victims and the role of District Legal Services Authority.
Judgment:
The Delhi High Court stressed that the compensation process should be swift and procedural delays are violative of victims’ rights. The court instructed authorities to ensure compliance with statutory timelines and guidelines.
Significance:
This judgment emphasized procedural efficiency and accountability in victim compensation schemes under the CrPC.
Summary of Legal Principles from These Cases:
Victim compensation is an integral part of criminal justice under Section 357 and 357A of the CrPC.
Courts have the authority to order compensation as part of sentencing or independently.
Compensation aims to restore dignity and provide relief to victims.
States are mandated to establish Victim Compensation Funds for timely and adequate relief.
Compensation is also a remedy for violation of fundamental rights (Article 21).
Promptness and procedural efficiency in disbursing compensation are critical for effective justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments