Victim Compensation Programs
🧾 I. What Are Victim Compensation Programs?
Victim Compensation Programs (VCPs) are state-supported schemes that provide monetary relief and rehabilitation support to victims of crimes, especially serious offences like:
Rape and sexual assault
Acid attacks
Trafficking
Child abuse
Dowry deaths
Death or grievous injury due to crime
These programs recognize the right of the victim to receive compensation from the State, regardless of whether the offender is convicted or even identified.
⚖️ II. Legal Framework
1. Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
Inserted through the CrPC (Amendment) Act, 2008, and effective from 31.12.2009.
Key Provisions:
Every State Government must prepare a Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS) in coordination with the Central Government.
Victims or dependents can apply for compensation even when the offender is not traced or tried.
Court may recommend compensation during or after trial.
Legal Services Authorities (LSA) are the implementing agencies.
2. Section 357 CrPC
Provides for court-ordered compensation at the time of sentencing.
3. Judicial Activism (Article 21 – Right to Life and Dignity)
Courts have held that compensation is part of the State’s responsibility to uphold the dignity and rights of crime victims under Article 21 of the Constitution.
🔍 III. Challenges in Implementation
| Challenge | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Delayed disbursement | Bureaucratic red tape often delays compensation. |
| Lack of awareness | Many victims are unaware of their right to claim compensation. |
| Unequal schemes across states | Different states offer varying compensation amounts. |
| Administrative burden | State Legal Services Authorities are often overburdened. |
🏛️ IV. Key Case Laws on Victim Compensation
1. Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) – Acid Attack Victim Compensation
Citation: (2014) 4 SCC 427
Court: Supreme Court of India
🔹 Facts:
Laxmi, an acid attack survivor, filed a PIL seeking regulation of acid sale and proper compensation for victims.
🔹 Judgment:
Supreme Court ordered all states to frame Victim Compensation Schemes under Section 357A CrPC.
Directed that acid attack victims must be paid at least ₹3 lakh by the State Governments as interim compensation.
Mandated free medical treatment, including reconstructive surgery.
🔹 Significance:
Strengthened the framework of State liability for victim rehabilitation.
Recognized dignity and rights of survivors under Article 21.
Set the tone for mandatory state-funded compensation, even before conviction.
2. Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2018) – Compensation for Rape Survivors
Citation: (2019) 2 SCC 703
Court: Supreme Court of India
🔹 Facts:
The case dealt with privacy and protection of rape survivors, including issues of identity disclosure and compensation.
🔹 Judgment:
Supreme Court directed all states to adopt the NALSA Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/other Crimes – 2018.
Specified minimum compensation:
₹5 lakh to ₹10 lakh for rape survivors.
₹7 lakh to ₹8 lakh for victims of acid attacks causing disfigurement.
Emphasized that compensation should be paid without waiting for conviction.
🔹 Significance:
Empowered Legal Services Authorities to act swiftly.
Helped bring uniformity in compensation across states.
Reiterated that right to rehabilitation is a constitutional right.
3. Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra (2013) – Mandatory Compensation
Citation: (2013) 6 SCC 770
Court: Supreme Court of India
🔹 Facts:
Trial court and High Court convicted the accused under Sections 302 and 307 IPC but did not order any compensation to the victim’s family.
🔹 Judgment:
Supreme Court ruled that courts are duty-bound to consider compensation under Section 357 CrPC.
Failure to apply this section amounts to a dereliction of judicial duty.
Compensation must be independent of fine or imprisonment.
🔹 Significance:
Reinforced judicial obligation to address victim’s rights during sentencing.
Encouraged trial courts to use Section 357 CrPC actively.
4. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Tara Dutt (2000) – Compensation Even Without Conviction
Citation: AIR 2000 SC 297
Court: Supreme Court
🔹 Facts:
In a case of death due to crime, the accused was acquitted due to lack of evidence, but the victim’s family claimed compensation.
🔹 Judgment:
Held that acquittal does not bar compensation under Section 357A CrPC.
State must provide financial support when a crime leads to death or injury, even if offender is unknown or not convicted.
🔹 Significance:
Expanded the scope of compensation beyond just the convicted cases.
Shifted focus to victim’s suffering, not just conviction status.
5. Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995) – Rape Compensation (PIL)
Citation: (1995) 1 SCC 14
Court: Supreme Court
🔹 Facts:
Petition filed to seek justice for six tribal women raped by paramilitary personnel. The issue was lack of compensation and legal aid.
🔹 Judgment:
Supreme Court directed the formation of criminal injuries compensation boards.
Recognized the need for compensation as a fundamental right for rape victims.
Held that compensation is a separate remedy from punishment, grounded in Article 21.
🔹 Significance:
One of the earliest cases linking victim rehabilitation to constitutional rights.
Prompted the evolution of structured victim compensation laws.
✅ V. Key Takeaways
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Victim-Centric Approach | Emphasis has shifted from offender punishment to victim rights and rehabilitation. |
| State Responsibility | Compensation is now seen as a State obligation, even in absence of conviction. |
| Judicial Duty | Courts are mandated to consider compensation in every eligible case. |
| Legal Services Authorities | Play a central role in processing and disbursing compensation. |
| Constitutional Backing | Article 21 (Right to Life) forms the bedrock of the right to compensation. |
🏁 VI. Conclusion
Victim Compensation Programs in India have evolved into a powerful tool of restorative justice. The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in developing these schemes through progressive interpretation of CrPC, constitutional rights, and PILs. While implementation challenges remain, case law has firmly established that no victim should suffer in silence or poverty because of a crime committed against them.
RELATED Blog
0 comments