Victim Impact Statements And Influence On Sentencing

04 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

🧾 1. Concept of Victim Impact Statement (VIS)

A Victim Impact Statement is a written or oral statement made by the victim (or their family) describing the physical, emotional, psychological, and financial harm caused by the crime. It is usually presented during the sentencing phase of a criminal trial.

Purpose:

To give victims a voice in the criminal justice process.

To help the court understand the full impact of the crime.

To guide judges in imposing a sentence that reflects the gravity of harm suffered.

⚖️ 2. Legal Basis

(a) International/Western Jurisdictions:

In the U.S., the Victim and Witness Protection Act (1982) and the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (2004) guarantee victims the right to be heard at sentencing.

In the U.K., the Victim Personal Statement (VPS) allows victims to express how the crime affected them.

(b) India:

While there is no specific “VIS” statute, Section 235(2) and Section 248(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) require the court to hear the accused before sentencing.
However, victim participation has been judicially recognized and strengthened through case law and statutory amendments, such as Section 357-A CrPC (Victim Compensation Scheme).

🏛️ 3. Influence on Sentencing

Victim Impact Statements influence sentencing by:

Highlighting the degree of harm to the victim.

Emphasizing public interest and deterrence.

Informing the appropriateness of compensation or restitution orders.

In capital or severe punishment cases, courts may consider the victim’s suffering as an aggravating factor.

However, courts also maintain balance — ensuring sentences are not emotionally driven but legally proportionate.

📚 4. Important Case Laws (Detailed Explanation)

Case 1: Booth v. Maryland (1987) 482 U.S. 496 (U.S. Supreme Court)

Facts:
Booth was convicted of murdering an elderly couple. During sentencing, a victim impact statement describing the family’s emotional trauma was read to the jury.

Issue:
Whether such statements violated the Eighth Amendment (prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment) by introducing irrelevant emotional factors.

Held:
The U.S. Supreme Court held that VIS was unconstitutional in capital sentencing because it might lead to arbitrary and capricious death sentences influenced by emotion rather than reason.

Impact:
This case initially restricted the use of VIS in capital punishment cases.

Case 2: Payne v. Tennessee (1991) 501 U.S. 808 (U.S. Supreme Court)

Facts:
Payne was convicted of murdering a woman and her child. The prosecution introduced testimony from the surviving child and grandmother about how the crime affected them.

Issue:
Should Booth v. Maryland be overruled?

Held:
Yes. The Court reversed Booth, holding that victim impact evidence is permissible, as it helps the jury understand the specific harm caused and that justice requires consideration of the victim’s individuality.

Significance:
Payne v. Tennessee is the leading precedent in the U.S. affirming the use of VIS during sentencing. It restored the victim’s voice in court proceedings.

Case 3: State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) 2 SCC 384 (India)

Facts:
In a rape case, the trial court imposed a reduced sentence citing the victim’s age and the accused’s family circumstances.

Held:
The Supreme Court criticized lenient sentencing, stressing the mental trauma and social stigma suffered by rape victims. The Court emphasized that the impact on the victim must be considered when deciding punishment.

Significance:
This case underscored the importance of acknowledging the victim’s suffering in sentencing, foreshadowing later acceptance of VIS principles in India.

Case 4: State of Rajasthan v. Vinod Kumar (2012) 6 SCC 770

Facts:
The accused was convicted of raping a minor. The High Court reduced his sentence.

Held:
The Supreme Court restored the sentence, observing that the impact on the victim’s life, particularly a minor, must guide the court in determining just punishment.

Significance:
The Court reaffirmed that victim’s trauma and future harm are critical considerations — closely resembling the purpose of a VIS.

Case 5: Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra (2019) 15 SCC 470

Facts:
The case involved the gang rape and murder of a woman. The Court considered the family’s loss and community outrage.

Held:
The Supreme Court held that victim impact and community harm are relevant in balancing mitigating and aggravating factors in capital punishment. The pain, suffering, and indignation of victims and their families must not be ignored.

Significance:
This case is among the few in India where the Court explicitly discussed “victim impact” as a factor in sentencing, harmonizing Indian jurisprudence with international norms.

Case 6 (Bonus): Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470

Facts:
A brutal massacre involving multiple murders.

Held:
The Supreme Court laid down guidelines for capital punishment, stating that sentencing should consider not only the crime but also its impact on the victims and society at large.

Significance:
Although prior to explicit VIS recognition, this case is foundational — emphasizing the collective conscience of society and victim suffering as sentencing determinants.

🧠 5. Conclusion

Victim Impact Statements have evolved from being controversial (due to emotional influence concerns) to being an accepted and essential component of the sentencing process.
They bring restorative justice into focus — recognizing the victim’s pain, not just the offender’s guilt.

Aspect	Traditional Sentencing	Modern Sentencing (with VIS)
Focus	Crime and offender	Crime, offender, and victim
Justice	Retributive	Restorative + Retributive
Role of Victim	Passive	Active Participant
Example	Booth v. Maryland (1987)	Payne v. Tennessee (1991), Gurmit Singh (1996)