INTRODUCTION

In recent years the growing interest in criminal-victims relationship has begun to challenge the
‘popularity’ of the alarm and indignation against the criminal law breakers that has been coupled
with a longstanding indifference to the victim of crime. Crime affects a large number of victims
who suffer physical, social, financial or emotional injury or harm which needs to be promptly
redressed by providing them easy access to justice. Though, the victims of crime have generally
found support and assistance from their family, tribe or community, they have, by and large,
remained ‘forgotten person’ in the criminal justice administration system. It is only in recent
decades that the impact of the victimization on crime affected persons drew attention of criminal
law jurisdictions around the world and they were convinced that the victims needed to be treated
with compassion and their dignity and fundamental rights must be protected and preserved.

Criminal Law has always discouraged the acts or omissions, which in general can affect rights in
rem and violators have always been punished with strict sanctions but the crime rate is not falling
and State is in regular quest to preserve social solidarity and peace in society. The initial focus of
criminologists was only on the aspect of punishment but the focus started shifting when they
encountered with the fact that the person who is victim of crime is getting nothing out of the whole
process of criminal justice system or is getting a so called satisfaction by seeing the offender
punished. Therefore jurists, penologist etc in all countries started giving their full attention to the
cause of victim in form of compensation and hence the whole debate started about ways, means and
extent of compensation.

MEANING OF VICTIM OF CRIME

The etymological meaning of phrase ‘Victim’ suggests that it would mean or will encompass:
i. Anyone suffering physical, emotional or financial harm as a direct result of a Crime.
ii. Spouses and children of the person who have suffered.
iii. Parents, foster parents, siblings, guardians or other custodians of minor victims, mentally or
physically incapacitated victims, or victims of homicide.

In this regard reliance can be placed upon United Nations General Assembly Declaration of Basic
Principles of Justice for Victim and Abuse of Power adopted in November 1985, which through
Article 1&2 gave exhaustive definition of the phrase:

Article 1- "Victims" means persons who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm, including
physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their
fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws operative within
Member States, including those laws proscribing criminal abuse of power.

Article 2- A person may be considered a victim, under this Declaration, regardless of whether the
perpetrator is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or convicted and regardless of the family
relationship between the perpetrator and the victim. The term "victim" also includes, where
appropriate, the immediate family or dependants of the direct victim and persons who have suffered
harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization.1

As per Code of criminal procedure, Section 2(wa) ‘Victim’ means a person who has suffered any
loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused person has been
charged ‘and the expression ‘victim’ includes hir/her guardians and legal heir of the victim.’
This definition which was incorporated by the 2008 criminal procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008, is
a step in positive direction. However the term “for which the accused is charged” shows the
restrictive nature of this definition. The definition is narrow when compared to the definitions
provided in other International human rights instruments.

COMPENSATION
In ancient societies, the social control was victim retaliation and personal reparation. This was
actually before the conceptual separation between civil and criminal law. The offender was required
to reimburse the victim or his family for the loss he has caused as a result of crime. Later as society
became more complex with state assuming dominant role in the investigation and prosecution of
offences, a division between civil and criminal law emerged and victim’s right to compensation was
incorporated into civil law. This was the position till recently. However recent trend shows that
policy makers of criminal justice system all over the world are stressing upon providing justice to
the victim and also to develop schemes of the payment of compensation to him. It is also argued
that every crime depicts failure of the part of the state to protect its subject and hence it has to
compensate him when he suffers as a result of the crime. Moreover, once crime is committed, the
victim has the right to get justice and remedy the harm which he has suffered as a result of crime.
This right is different from and independent of the right to retribution and responsibility of the state
governed by rule of law. But if state fails to discharge this responsibility, it must still provide a
mechanism by which it is to ensure that Victims right to compensation for injury is not lost. As
observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maru Ram v. Union of India, stressing the importance
of victim’s right to compensation;

1
United Nations General Assembly Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victim and Abuse of Power
“ ... A victim of crime cannot be a ‘forgotten man’ in the criminal justice system. It is he who
has suffered the most. His family is ruined particularly in the case of death and other bodily
injury. This is apart from factors like loss of reputation, humiliation, etc. An honour which is
lost or life which is snuffed out cannot be recompensed but then monetary compensation will
at least provide some solace.
Thus it can be stated that object of granting compensation to the victim is to alleviate the sufferings
of the victim, to make the loss easier to bear for the victim and his family, re humanise victims and
restore their dignity. It also has its object to encourage the victim to report the crime and cooperate
with the criminal justice system.

MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT WITH REGARD TO COMPENSATION TO

VICTIMS OF CRIME

I. COMMITTEE AND ITS NECESSITY

The Committee on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System was constituted by the Government of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs by its order dated 24 November 2000, to consider measures for
revamping the Criminal Justice System. The terms of reference for the Committee were:
i. To examine the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence, including the
constitutional provisions relating to criminal jurisprudence and see if any modifications
or amendments are required thereto;
ii. To examine in the light of findings on fundamental principles and aspects of criminal
jurisprudence as to whether there is a need to re-write the Code of Criminal Procedure,
the Indian Penal Code and the Indian Evidence Act to bring them in tune with the
demand of the times and in harmony with the aspirations of the people of India;
iii. To make specific recommendations on simplifying judicial procedures and practices and
making the delivery of justice to the common man closer, faster, uncomplicated and
inexpensive;
iv. To suggest ways and means of developing such synergy among the judiciary, the
Prosecution and the Police as restores the confidence of the common man in the
Criminal Justice System by protecting the innocent and the victim and by punishing
unsparingly the guilty and the criminal;
v. To suggest sound system of managing, on professional lines, the pendency of cases at
investigation and trial stages and making the Police, the Prosecution and the Judiciary
 accountable for delays in their respective domains;

Referring to the state of criminal justice in India, the Government Notification constituting the
Criminal Justice Reforms committee (Malimath Committee) observed:
“…..People by and large have lost confidence in the Criminal Justice System …. Victims feel
ignored and are crying for attention and justice …. there is need for developing a cohesive system,
in which, all parts work in co-ordination to achieve the common goal.”

Very early in the deliberations of the Committee, it was recognized that victims do not get at
present the legal rights and protection they deserve to play their just role in criminal proceedings
which tend to result in disinterestedness in the proceedings and consequent distortions in criminal
justice administration. In every interaction the Committee had with the police, the Judges, the
prosecution and defence lawyers, jail officials and the general public, this concern for victims was
quite pronounced and a view was canvassed that unless justice to the victim is put as one of the
focal points of Criminal proceedings, the system is unlikely to restore the balance as a fair
procedure in the pursuit of truth. Furthermore, it was pointed out that support and co-operation of
witnesses would not be forthcoming unless their status is considerably improved along with justice
to victims. This perception was strengthened while the Committee examined the systems prevalent
in other jurisdictions. The U. N. system also wanted member countries to guarantee rights of
victims of crime through their respective legal systems. In the circumstances, the Committee
resolved to give adequate importance to the idea of justice to victims of crime in the scheme of
reform to be recommended.

II. COMPENSATION FOR VICTIM

The committee observes that the principle of compensating victims of crime has for long been
recognized by the law though it is recognized more as a token relief rather than part of a punishment
or substantial remedy. When the sentence of fine is imposed as the sole punishment or an additional
punishment, the whole or part of it may be directed to be paid to the person having suffered loss or
injury as per the discretion of the Court (Section 357 Cr.P.C.). Compensation can be awarded only
if the offender has been convicted of the offence with which he is charged.

a) Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

While Section 357 (i)(c) provides for the payment of compensation out of the fine imposed, Section
357 (3) makes way for the payment of compensation even if fine does not form part of the
punishment. The amount of compensation, which the Court can thus order, is flexible enough to
make it real and truly compensatory. It may be paid directly to the beneficiary before the court on a
fixed date and if not so paid, may be reconsidered as a fine.

b) Section 3 and 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958

Compensation may also be ordered even in case the convicted person is released after due
admonition or on probation of good conduct (Sections 3 & 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958).
Costs can also be made payable under such circumstances.

III. DIFFICULTIES IN GRANTING COMPENSATION TO VICTIMS

Firstly, Committee observes that the payment of compensation by the offender is not possible where
there is acquittal or where the offender is not apprehended.

Secondly, the payment remains suspended till the limitation period for the appeal expires or if an
appeal is filed, till the appeal is disposed of [Section 357(2) Cr. P. C.] The delay in the realization of
the amount often adds to the woes of the victim.

Thirdly, the order of compensation by the court is discretionary as words used in section 357 sub
section (1) and sub section (3) are ‘may’.

Fourthly, a person who fails to pay the fine/compensation is normally required to undergo
imprisonment in default of the said payment. There are many cases of default for a variety of
reasons. The result is again denial of compensation for the victim even in those few cases, which
end in conviction. The hopeless victim is indeed a cipher in modern Indian criminal law and its
administration according to the Committee.

IV. JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Sympathizing with the plight of victims under Criminal Justice administration and taking advantage
of the obligation to do complete justice under the Indian Constitution in defence of human rights,
the Supreme Court and High Courts in India have of late evolved the practice of awarding
compensatory remedies not only in terms of money but also in terms of other appropriate reliefs and
remedies. Medical justice for the Bhagalpur blinded victims, rehabilitative justice to the communal
violence victims and compensatory justice to the Union Carbide victims are examples of this liberal
package of reliefs and remedies forged by the apex Court.
The decisions in Nilahati Behera V. State of Orissa [(1993) 2 SCC 746] and in Chairman,Railway
Board V. Chandrima Das are illustrative of this new trend of using Constitutional jurisdiction to do
justice to victims of crime. Substantial monetary compensations have been awarded against the
instrumentalities of the State for failure to protect the rights of the victim.

These decisions have clearly acknowledged the need for compensating victims of violent crimes
irrespective of the fact whether offenders are apprehended or punished. The principle invoked is the
obligation of the State to protect basic rights and to deliver justice to victims of crimes fairly and
quickly. According to the committee, it was time that Criminal Justice System takes note of these
principles of Indian Constitution and legislates on the subject suitably.

The principle of payment of compensation to the victim of crime was evolved by Hon'ble Supreme
Court on the ground that it is duty of the welfare state to protect the fundamental rights of the
citizens not only against the actions of its agencies but is also responsible for hardships on the
victims on the grounds of humanitarianism and obligation of social welfare, duty to protect it's
subject, equitable Justice etc .

In Bhagalur blinding case1, in a series of incidents in 1979 and 1980 in Bhagalpur in the state of
Bihar, India when police blinded 31 under trials (or convicted criminals, according to some
versions), by pouring acid into their eyes. The Bhagalpur blinding case had made criminal
jurisprudence history by becoming the first in which the Supreme Court had ordered compensation
for violation of basic human rights.

Rudal Shah v State of Bihar 2 is the most celebrated case where the Hon'ble S.C. directed the state to
pay compensation of Rs 35,000 to Rudal Shah who was kept in jail for 14 years even after his
acquittal on the ground of insanity and held that it is violation of Article 21 done by the State of
Bihar.

The case of Bhim Singh v State of J&K3  is another important case where Bhim Singh an MLA was
arrested by the police only to prevent him to attended the Legislative Assembly, the Hon'ble Court
not only entertained the writ petition of his wife but also awarded the compensation of Rs 50,000 to
be paid by the state.

2
AIR 1983 SC 1086
3
AIR 1986 SC 498
In the case of Nilabati Behra v State of Orissa4 where the son of petitioner was arrested by the
police and next morning his body was found laying down with several injuries on the railway track,
the Hon'ble S.C. awarded the compensation of Rs 1,50,000 that is to be paid by the State.

On the issue of brutal use of force and misuse of authority by the police out side the police station
case of SAHELI v Commissioner of Police5 is land mark where the son of Kamlesh Kumari died due
to ill treatment by a S.I. of Delhi Police, the Hon'ble S.C. directed the Delhi Adm. to pay the
compensation of Rs 75,000.
The next in the line is the case of Bodhisatwa Gautam v Subhra Chakraborty6 where the Hon'ble
S.C. invented the concept of interim compensation and ruled that compensation will be justified
even if the accused was not convicted.

Reprimanding the attitude of invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,the Supreme Court in the Hari
Krishna & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh (hereinafter “Hari Krishna”)7, directed all courts to
exercise Section 357 liberally and award adequate compensation, particularly in cases where the
accused is released on admonition, probation or when the parties enter into a compromise. At the
same time, the court cautioned that the compensation must be reasonable, fair and just; taking into
account the facts and circumstances of each case nature of the crime, veracity of the claim and
ability of the accused to pay.8 The following paragraph from the court’s judgment sums up the
importance of Section 357(3) succinctly:
“Section 357 of the CrPC is an important provision but Courts have seldom invoked it. This section
of law empowers the Court to award compensation while passing judgment of conviction. In
addition to conviction, the Court may order the accused to pay some amount by way of
compensation to the victim who has suffered by the action of the accused. This power to award
compensation is not ancillary to other sentences but is in addition thereto. It is a measure of
responding appropriately to crime as well as reconciling the victim with the offender. It is, to some
extent, a constructive approach to crimes. It is indeed a step forward in our criminal justice system.
We therefore recommend to all courts to exercise this power liberally so as to meet the ends of
justice in a better way.”
4
(1993) 2 SCC 746
5
AIR 1990 SC 513
6
AIR 1996 SC 922
7
Hari Krishna & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh, (1988) 4 S.C.C. 551.
8
Dr. Kaushal Kishor Bajpai, The History of Compensation of the Victims of Crime, AIR WEB WORLD,
http://airwebworld.com/articles/ index.php?article=1058 .
In Sarwan Singh and others v. State of Punjab9 and Dilip S. Dahanukar v. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd.
and Anr.10, Supreme Court held that the power of the Courts to award compensation to victims
under Section 357 is not ancillary to other sentences but in addition thereto and that imposition of
fine and/or grant of compensation to a great extent must depend upon the relevant factors apart from
such fine or compensation being just and reasonable.
In Dilip S. Dahanukar’s case (supra) Court even favoured an inquiry albeit summary in nature to
determine the paying capacity of the offender. The Court said:
“.... The purpose of imposition of fine and/or grant of compensation to a great extent must be
considered having the relevant factors therefore in mind. It may be compensating the person in one
way or the other. The amount of compensation sought to be imposed, thus, must be reasonable and
not arbitrary. Before issuing a direction to pay compensation, the capacity of accused to pay the
same must be judged. A fortiori, an enquiry in this behalf even in a summary way may be necessary
.Some reasons, which may not be very elaborate, may also have to be assigned; the purpose being
that whereas the power to impose fine is limited and direction to pay compensation can be made for
one or the other factors enumerated out of the same; but sub- Section (3) of Section 357 does not
impose any such limitation and thus, power there under should be exercised only in appropriate
cases. Such a jurisdiction cannot be exercised at the whims and caprice of a judge.”

There is no gainsaying that Section 357 confers a power on the Court in so far as it makes it “legal
and possible which there would otherwise be no right or authority to do” viz. to award
compensation to victims in criminal cases. The question is whether despite the use of discretionary
language such as the word “may”, there is “something” in the nature of the power to award
compensation in criminal cases, in the object for which the power is conferred or in the title of the
persons for whose benefit it is to be exercised which, coupled with the power conferred under the
provision, casts a duty on the Court to apply its mind to the question of exercise of this power in
every criminal case.

In Smt. Bachahan Devi and Anr. v. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and Anr. 11 Court while dealing with
the use of the word “may” summoned up the legal position thus:
“...It is well-settled that the use of word `may' in a statutory provision would not by itself show that
the provision is directory in nature. In some cases, the legislature may use the word `may' as a
9
(1978) 4 SCC 111
10
(2007) 6 SCC 528
11
AIR 2008 SC 1282
matter of pure conventional courtesy and yet intend a mandatory force. In order, therefore, to
interpret the legal import of the word `may', the court has to consider various factors, namely, the
object and the scheme of the Act, the context and the background against which the words have
been used, the purpose and the advantages sought to be achieved by the use of this word, and the
like. It is equally well-settled that where the word `may' involves a discretion coupled with an
obligation or where it confers a positive benefit to a general class of subjects in a utility Act, or
where the court advances a remedy and suppresses the mischief, or where giving the words
directory significance would defeat the very object of the Act, the word `may' should be interpreted
to convey a mandatory force...”

Applying the tests, which emerge from the above cases to Section 357, it appears that the provision
confers a power coupled with a duty on the Courts to apply its mind to the question of awarding
compensation in every criminal case. The power to award compensation was intended to reassure
the victim that he or she is not forgotten in the criminal justice system. The victim would remain
forgotten in the criminal justice system if despite Legislature having gone so far as to enact specific
provisions relating to victim compensation, Courts choose to ignore the provisions altogether and
do not even apply their mind to the question of compensation. It follows that unless Section 357 is
read to confer an obligation on Courts to apply their mind to the question of compensation, it would
defeat the very object behind the introduction of the provision. If application of mind is not
considered mandatory, the entire provision would be rendered a dead letter.

Therefore it can be observed that the Hon'ble Courts have taken softer view with regard to monetary
aspect, when question of the award of compensation come under Cr.P.C. as compared to when it
come under Constitution.

JUSTICE TO VICTIMS OF CRIME : RECOMMENDATION

An important object of the Criminal Justice System is to ensure justice to the victims, yet he has not
been given any substantial right, not even to participate in the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the
Committee feels that the system must focus on justice to victims and has thus, made the following
recommendations which include the right of the victim to participate in cases involving serious
crimes and to adequate compensation.
Victim compensation is a State obligation in all serious crimes, whether the offender is apprehended
or not, convicted or acquitted. This is to be organised in a separate legislation by Parliament. The
draft bill on the subject submitted to Government in 1995 by the Indian Society of Victimology
provides a tentative framework for Consideration
The Victim Compensation law will provide for the creation of a Victim Compensation Fund to be
administered possibly by the Legal Services Authority. The law should provide for the scale of
compensation in different offences for the guidance of the Court. It may specify offences in which
compensation may not be granted and conditions under which it may be awarded or withdrawn.

FUNCTIONAL ASPECTS OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS

After the recommendations of the Committee following amendments have been made in the
Cr. P.C.
i) Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2008
a. To address the absence of a definition of a victim, subsection (wa) has been inserted in
Section 2 of the amended Cr.P.C as below: ‘victim’ means a person who has suffered any
loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused person has
been charged and the expression ‘victim’ includes his or her guardian or legal heir”.
b. Addition of Section 357A (Victim compensation scheme) to the Cr.P.C.

Under the amended Indian law, sub-section (1) of Section357A of the Cr.P.C discusses the
preparation of a scheme to provide funds for the compensation of victims or his dependents who
have suffered loss or injury as a result of a crime and who require rehabilitation. Sub-section (2)
states that whenever the Court makes a recommendation for compensation the District Legal
Service Authority or the State Legal Service Authority, as the case may be, shall decide the
quantum of compensation to be awarded under the above-mentioned scheme. It is significant that
the Legal Services Authority, comprising of technical experts, has been entrusted the task of
deciding the quantum of compensation, since they are better equipped to calculate/quantify the loss
suffered by a victim. However, the provision loses its teeth because the discretion remains with the
judge to refer the case to the Legal Services Authority- a situation that has previously been the
vanishing point of Indian victim compensation law. The problem is compounded by the fact that
traditionally Indian judges have been hesitant to invoke this provision. A more effective solution
could be to make compensation a statutory right, with a provision mandating that the judges have to
record reasons for not awarding compensation. It is a positive development that in sub-section (3)
the trial court has been empowered to make recommendations for compensation in cases where-
 Either the quantum of compensation fixed by the Legal Services Authority is found to be
inadequate; or,
 Where the case ends in acquittal or discharge of the accused and the victim has to be
rehabilitated.
However, there is scope to further extend compensation to victims in these cases that end in
acquittal or discharge beyond rehabilitation to compensation for loss. Sub-section (4) of Section
357A states that even where no trial takes place and the offender is not traced or identified; but the
victim is known, the victim or his dependents can apply to the State or the District Legal Services
Authority for award of compensation. We see a shift towards state funded victim compensation as
has been established in the United Kingdom and the United States. This is an extremely progressive
development that takes into account practical reality of an over burdened criminal justice system,
which is unable to identify all offenders and prosecute them. Sub-section (5) says that on receipt of
the application under sub-section (4), the State or the District Legal Services Authority shall, after
due enquiry award adequate compensation by completing the enquiry within two months.
It is pertinent that a time frame has been provided within which the Legal Services Authority should
conduct its enquiry and award compensation. A period of two months, as specified in the proposed
amendment, would ensure speedy delivery of justice to the victim and specification of a time period
would create accountability and prevent dilatory measures. Moreover, it should be noted that the
section speaks of ‘adequate compensation’; thus ensuring the quantum of compensation awarded
should be just and fair.
Further, sub-section (6), states that, in order to alleviate the suffering of the victim, the State or
District Legal Services Authority may order immediate first-aid facility or medical benefits to be
made available free of cost or any other interim relief as the appropriate authority deems fit. It is a
positive that the section speaks of “alleviating the suffering” of the victim and seeks to help the
victim recover in the after-math of the crime and ensure that the victim does not have to wait till the
end of the trial to recover these costs. The statutory recognition of the right to interim relief is an
important step and an urgent need of the hour.

ii) Section 357B and Section 357C (Inserted after the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013)
It says that the compensation payable by the State Government under section 357A shall be in
addition to the payment of fine to the victim under section 326A or section 376D of the Indian
Penal Code. Moreover section 357C says that all hospitals, public or private, whether run by central
government, the state government, local bodies or any other person, shall immediately provide first
aid or medical treatment, free of cost, to the victims of any offence covered under section 326A,
376, 376B, 376C, 376D or section 376E of the IPC, and shall immediately inform the police of such
incident.

VICTIM COMPENSATION SCHEME

GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFIRS AND JUSTICE
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(Act 2 of 1974), and all other powers enabling him in this behalf, the Governor of Punjab in
coordination with the Central Government is pleased to frame the following scheme for providing
funds for the purpose of compensation to the victims or their dependents as a result of crime and
who require rehabilitation

Eligibility for Grant of Compensation :- The victim or his dependent satisfying the following
criteria shall be eligible for the grant of compensation :-
(1) He/She should not have been compensated for the loss or injury under any other Scheme of the
Central/Punjab Government, an Insurance Company or any other institution;
(2) Loss or Injury sustained by the victim or his dependent should have caused substantial loss to
the income of the family resulting difficulty in making both ends meet without the financial aid or
has to spend beyond his means on medical treatment; and
(3) Where the perpetrator of a crime is not traced or identified or where no trial takes place but the
victim is identified and the victim has to incur a lot of expenses on physical and mental
rehabilitation.

Procedure for grant of compensation :- (1) whenever a recommendation is made by the Court for
compensation or an application is made under sub-section (4) of section 357-A of the Act to the
District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority, as the case may be. The
District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority, as the case may be, shall
examine the case and shall verify the contents of the claim with regard to the loss or injury caused
to the claimant and also may call for any other relevant information necessary for the consideration
of the claim and after completing the enquiry within the stipulated period of two months, the
District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority, as the case may be, shall
award adequate compensation.
(2) The District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority, as the case may be,
shall decide the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the victim or his dependent on the basis
of loss caused to the victim, medical expenses incurred or to be incurred n treatment and minimum
sustenance amount required for rehabilitation including incidental charges such as funeral expenses
etc.
(3) The compensation may vary from case to case depending on facts of each case.
(4) The quantum of compensation to be awarded to the victim or his dependent shall not exceed the
maximum limit specified in Schedule.
(5) The amount of compensation awarded shall be disbursed to the victim or his dependent, as the
case may be, from the Fund.

Limitation:- No claim made by the victim or his dependent under sub-section (4) of section 357-A
of the Act shall be entertained after a period of six months of the commission of crime.
Provided that the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Service Authority, as the case
may be, if satisfied, for the reason to be recorded, in writing, may condone the delay in filing the
claim.

SCHEDULE

Date- 8th December,2011

Sr.No. Maximum Limit of

compensation.
1. Rs.1,00,000/-
2. Rs. 40,000/-
3. Rs. 30,000/-
4. Rs.20,000/-

Date- 13th June, 2013

Sr. No. Particular of Loss of Injury Maximum Limit of

compensation
1. Rape Rs. 2,00,000/-
2. Murder with rape Rs. 3,00,000/-
3. Victim of Human Trafficking, Child abuse and Kidnapping Rs. 50,000/-
4. Simple loss or injury to child victim Rs. 10,000/-
5. Rehabilitation of Women and Children Rs. 20,000/-
6. Victim of acid attack. Rs. 3 lac
a) In case of disfigurement of face Rs. 50,000/-
b) Other cases or injury
CONCLUSION

Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure has certainly taken care of the needs of victim
wherein the under sub-section (2) and (3) recommendation of the court can be made for the
compensation even in cases of acquittal and discharge of the accused or in cases the accused is not
apprehended, moreover under sub-section (4) even the victim can make an application to the State
or District Legal Services Authority. In addition to this sub section (5) makes a time frame within
which enquiry with regard to the compensation has to be completed.

There is a need to include persons who have suffered harm while intervening to assist victims in
distress or to prevent victimization. For instance, in the United States, specifically California,
Massachusetts and New York, have laws that provide for the compensation to those who suffer
injuries while preventing a crime or apprehending a criminal, etc. It is important that along with
victims the police are also entitled to compensation. Thus, these provisions encourage both the
police and populace at large, to curb crime.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. N.V.PARANJAPE, CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY

2. jils.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Jhalak-Kakkar-and-Shruti-Ojha.pdf
 3. Report of Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, Ministry of Home
Affairs, Government of India (2003)

4. VICTIM COMPENSATION SCHEME, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFIRS AND JUSTICE, (HOME-IV BRANCH)
NOTIFICATION

INDEX

Sr. No TOPIC PAGE No.

1 Introduction 1
2 MALIMATH COMMITTEE REPORT WITH REGARD TO 3
COMPENSATION TO VICTIMS OF CRIME
3 JUDICIAL DECISIONS 5
4 JUSTICE TO VICTIMS OF CRIME : RECOMMENDATION 9
5 FUNCTIONAL ASPECTS OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS 10
6 VICTIM COMPENSATION SCHEME,GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB 12
7 CONCLUSION 13

PRESENTATION

ON
 TOPIC: ‘’Recommendations of The Malimath
Committee with respect to Compensation to the victims
of crime’’

Submitted To Submitted By

Prof. Vijay Nagpal Navjot Singh

Department of Laws LLM 1222/17