Victim Support And Compensation Programs
Victim support and compensation programs are legal and social mechanisms designed to assist victims of crimes — especially those suffering physical, mental, or financial loss.
They ensure victims receive justice, rehabilitation, and dignity, which are essential components of a fair criminal justice system.
Under Indian law, such support is derived from:
Section 357, 357A, 357B, and 357C of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
Article 21 of the Constitution of India (Right to Life and Dignity)
Victim Compensation Schemes (VCS) established by each State Legal Services Authority (SLSA)
Various judicial precedents affirming victims’ rights.
⚖️ 1. Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar (1983) 4 SCC 141
Facts:
Rudul Sah was kept in jail for over 14 years even after being acquitted by the court. He filed a petition under Article 32, claiming compensation for his illegal detention and violation of fundamental rights.
Issue:
Can the Supreme Court award monetary compensation for violation of fundamental rights under Article 21?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that the State was liable to compensate the victim for wrongful imprisonment. Rudul Sah was awarded compensation for the deprivation of his liberty and mental suffering.
Significance:
This was the first case where compensation was directly granted for violation of a fundamental right.
It laid the foundation for state liability in cases of unlawful acts by public officials and set a precedent for future victim compensation jurisprudence.
⚖️ 2. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) 2 SCC 746
Facts:
The petitioner’s son was taken into police custody and later found dead with multiple injuries. The police denied involvement.
Issue:
Whether compensation could be granted for custodial death as a violation of Article 21.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held the State vicariously liable and awarded compensation to the victim’s mother. It stated that public law remedies under Article 32 and Article 226 empower the courts to grant monetary relief for violation of fundamental rights.
Significance:
This case firmly established that compensation is an appropriate and effective remedy for breach of the right to life.
It also differentiated between public law compensation (constitutional remedy) and private law (civil damages).
⚖️ 3. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
Facts:
The case arose from multiple reports of custodial violence and deaths. The petitioner sought guidelines to prevent such human rights violations.
Issue:
What safeguards must be followed to protect detainees’ rights, and can compensation be awarded for custodial violence?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court issued 11 landmark guidelines to be followed during arrest and detention (such as mandatory arrest memo, medical examination, and right to inform relatives). It also held that compensation is an appropriate public law remedy for custodial violence.
Significance:
This case institutionalized preventive victim support measures and recognized the right to compensation as a fundamental part of Article 21.
⚖️ 4. Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) 4 SCC 427 (Acid Attack Victim Case)
Facts:
Laxmi, an acid attack survivor, filed a PIL seeking stricter regulation of acid sales and adequate compensation and rehabilitation for victims.
Issue:
What measures should the government take to prevent acid attacks and support victims?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court directed:
A minimum compensation of ₹3 lakhs to every acid attack victim under Section 357A CrPC.
Regulation of acid sales.
Free medical treatment and rehabilitation support from state governments.
Significance:
This case marked a turning point in victim support policies, mandating structured financial aid, medical care, and social reintegration for victims of grievous crimes.
⚖️ 5. Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2019) 2 SCC 703
Facts:
The case concerned the protection, compensation, and rehabilitation of rape survivors, including minors under the POCSO Act.
Issue:
What guidelines should be issued for compensation and protection of sexual assault victims?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court directed:
Uniform Victim Compensation Schemes across all states.
Non-disclosure of victims’ identities under Section 228A IPC.
Free medical, legal, and psychological assistance to survivors.
Significance:
The judgment strengthened statutory victim compensation under Section 357A CrPC, ensuring that survivors of sexual violence receive consistent and adequate compensation across India.
⚖️ 6. Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995) 1 SCC 14
Facts:
The case involved multiple incidents of sexual assault on domestic working women who lacked financial and legal resources for justice.
Issue:
What framework should be provided for legal aid and rehabilitation of rape victims?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court directed:
Establishment of Criminal Injuries Compensation Boards.
Provision of legal representation, medical care, and financial support to victims.
Emphasized the need for victim-centric justice in rape trials.
Significance:
This case was the foundation for the Victim Compensation Scheme under Section 357A CrPC (2008 Amendment) and remains a key precedent for government-funded victim aid.
⚖️ 7. State of Gujarat v. Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat (1998) 7 SCC 392
Facts:
The issue was related to victims of police atrocities and the delay in granting compensation and rehabilitation.
Issue:
Can High Courts direct the State to compensate victims under Article 226?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court upheld that High Courts possess inherent powers under Article 226 to award compensation for violation of fundamental rights, even without a criminal conviction.
Significance:
This expanded the scope of victim compensation beyond criminal trials — allowing direct constitutional intervention for justice.
⚖️ 8. Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra (2013) 6 SCC 770
Facts:
The trial court convicted the accused for murder but did not order compensation under Section 357 CrPC. The victim’s family appealed.
Issue:
Is it mandatory for courts to consider compensation under Section 357 CrPC while passing a sentence?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that courts are obliged to apply their mind to the question of compensation in every criminal case. Failure to consider it amounts to an error in sentencing.
Significance:
This judgment made victim compensation a judicial responsibility, not a discretion, ensuring that victims are financially assisted even during conviction proceedings.
⚖️ 9. Suresh v. State of Haryana (2015) 2 SCC 227
Facts:
A victim of an acid attack sought enforcement of compensation under Section 357A CrPC.
Issue:
Is compensation under Section 357A CrPC mandatory, and how should it be implemented?
Judgment:
The Supreme Court clarified that Section 357A CrPC creates a statutory duty upon the State to provide compensation to victims irrespective of the offender’s conviction. The State Legal Services Authority must ensure timely disbursement.
Significance:
This case made Victim Compensation Schemes enforceable rights, binding upon all States and Union Territories.
Legal Framework of Victim Support and Compensation in India
1. Section 357 CrPC
Empowers the court to award compensation to victims when imposing fines or sentences.
2. Section 357A CrPC (2008 Amendment)
Mandates every State Government to prepare a Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS) in coordination with the State Legal Services Authority (SLSA) for victims of crime.
3. Section 357B & 357C CrPC
Section 357B: Clarifies that compensation under Section 357A is in addition to fines imposed on offenders.
Section 357C: Ensures free medical treatment to victims of sexual offences and acid attacks.
4. State Legal Services Authorities (SLSA)
Each state maintains its own Victim Compensation Fund, determining eligibility, application procedures, and payment timelines.
Core Principles from the Case Laws
| Principle | Landmark Case |
|---|---|
| Right to compensation is a part of Article 21 | Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa |
| State is liable for illegal detention or police abuse | Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar |
| Preventive guidelines against custodial violence | D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal |
| Uniform compensation for sexual assault victims | Nipun Saxena v. Union of India |
| Structured victim rehabilitation and aid | Laxmi v. Union of India |
| Mandatory consideration of compensation in all cases | Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra |
| Creation of Criminal Injuries Compensation Board | Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. UOI |
Conclusion
Victim support and compensation have evolved from being an afterthought to a fundamental component of criminal justice.
Courts now emphasize:
Victims’ right to dignity, rehabilitation, and restitution.
State accountability for harm caused by crime or abuse of power.
Uniform and prompt compensation schemes for effective justice delivery.
Through landmark cases like Rudul Sah, Nilabati Behera, Laxmi, and Nipun Saxena, India has developed a strong constitutional and statutory framework that upholds victims’ rights as human rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments