Victim Support Programs In Criminal Justice

05 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

🧾 1. Introduction

In traditional criminal justice systems, focus was mainly on the offender — punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation — while victims were often neglected once the trial began.
However, modern legal systems, especially in India, emphasize victim rights, support, and compensation as essential components of justice.

Meaning of Victim Support Programs

Victim support programs refer to:

Legal and psychological assistance to victims of crime,

Financial compensation,

Rehabilitation, and

Participation in criminal proceedings.

These programs aim to ensure that victims are not re-victimized by the justice process itself.

⚖️ 2. Legal and Constitutional Framework

Constitutional Basis:

Article 21 – Right to life and dignity includes protection and rehabilitation of victims.

Article 14 – Equality before law extends to victims.

Directive Principles (Articles 38, 39A) – Ensure justice and aid for victims.

Statutory Basis:

Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC):

Section 357: Compensation to victims by courts.

Section 357A: Mandates every State Government to create a Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS) in coordination with the Central Government.

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

POCSO Act, 2012

Nirbhaya Fund (2013) – National financial assistance for women victims of violence.

📚 3. Detailed Case Law Analysis

Case 1: Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar (1983)

Facts: Rudul Sah was illegally detained for 14 years after acquittal.

Issue: Whether the state must compensate victims of wrongful detention.

Judgment: Supreme Court held that mere release was not enough; monetary compensation was necessary for violation of fundamental rights under Article 21.

Significance:

Pioneered the concept of compensation for violation of personal liberty.

Marked the beginning of victim compensation jurisprudence in India.

Case 2: Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993)

Facts: Victim died in police custody; mother filed petition under Article 32.

Issue: Can state be held liable and must pay compensation?

Judgment: Supreme Court held the State vicariously liable and awarded compensation of ₹1,50,000.

Significance:

Reaffirmed public law compensation as part of Article 21.

Compensation and rehabilitation became part of victim support programs.

Case 3: Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty (1996)

Facts: Accused, charged with rape under pretext of marriage, sought bail.

Issue: Whether interim compensation can be awarded to the victim even before conviction.

Judgment: Supreme Court ordered the accused to pay monthly compensation during trial.

Significance:

Recognized victim’s right to immediate support, even before final judgment.

Judicial innovation expanding the victim support concept.

Case 4: Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995)

Facts: PIL seeking justice for rape victims who lacked rehabilitation or legal aid.

Issue: What measures should exist for rape victim support?

Judgment: Supreme Court directed:

Establishment of compensation boards,

Legal representation for victims,

Psychological counseling and rehabilitation.

Significance:

Led to incorporation of Section 357A CrPC.

Recognized victims as central stakeholders in the justice process.

Case 5: Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra (2013)

Facts: Convicted person was sentenced, but court failed to address compensation.

Issue: Whether awarding compensation under Section 357 CrPC is discretionary or mandatory.

Judgment: Supreme Court held that courts must apply their mind to compensation in every conviction; omission to consider it amounts to error of law.

Significance:

Made victim compensation quasi-mandatory.

Strengthened statutory victim support framework.

Case 6: Laxmi v. Union of India (2014)

Facts: Acid attack survivor filed PIL seeking better medical care, compensation, and regulation of acid sale.

Judgment: Supreme Court directed:

Minimum compensation of ₹3,00,000 for acid attack victims,

Free medical treatment, and

Regulation of acid sales.

Significance:

Pivotal for State Victim Compensation Schemes under Section 357A.

Institutionalized Nirbhaya Fund for female victims of violence.

Case 7: Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India (2015)

Facts: Acid attack victims in Bihar denied compensation despite existing schemes.

Judgment: Supreme Court ordered immediate release of compensation and directed monitoring of victim support schemes by state governments.

Significance:

Reinforced effective implementation of victim support programs.

Focused on rehabilitation, not just compensation.

💡 4. Major Principles Evolved

Aspect	Judicial Interpretation
Right to Compensation	Integral to Article 21 (Rudul Sah, Nilabati Behera)
Interim Relief	Possible during trial (Bodhisattwa Gautam)
Mandatory Consideration	Courts must assess compensation in all cases (Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad)
Comprehensive Support	Includes legal aid, medical, psychological, and financial help (Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum)
Government Responsibility	States must establish and monitor Victim Compensation Schemes (Laxmi, Parivartan Kendra)

🏛️ 5. Institutional Mechanisms for Victim Support

National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) – Coordinates nationwide victim compensation guidelines.

State Legal Services Authorities (SLSA) – Implement Section 357A schemes.

One Stop Centres (OSCs) – Offer medical, legal, and psychological help to women victims.

District Legal Services Authorities (DLSA) – Process compensation applications and ensure rehabilitation.

6. Summary of Victim Support Evolution in India

1980s–1990s: Foundation through public law compensation (Rudul Sah, Nilabati Behera).

1995–2005: Expansion to gender crimes and procedural justice (Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum).

2009–Present: Institutional and statutory schemes under CrPC Section 357A, with judicial monitoring (Ankush Gaikwad, Laxmi).

Focus today: Victim empowerment, rehabilitation, and participatory justice.

✅ 7. Conclusion

Victim support programs are now an essential pillar of criminal justice in India.
Through progressive judicial interpretation, victims have evolved from passive sufferers to active participants in justice.
Courts, legislatures, and institutions have collectively built a system focused on restitution, dignity, and healing — integral to a fair and humane justice process.