PENOLOGY

PROJECT WORK
ON
VICTIM COMPENSATION

Submitted to: Submitted by:

Mr. Hakim Yasir Abbas Noorul Hasan
Faculty of Law LL.M. - 1st Year
Jamia Millia Islamia Student ID-20153686

0|Page
 Contents

1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..2
1.1 Literature Review……………………………………………………………...…2
1.2 Research Questions……………………………………………………………....4
2. Victimology and Victim Compensation: Philosophical Basis……………………..…….5
2.1 Victimology – Definition & Meaning…………………………………………....5
2.2 Victimology – Historical Perspective………………………………………...….7
2.3 Theoris of Victimology…………………………………………………….……..7
2.4 Victim Compensation………………………………………………………...…..9
2.5 Victim Compensation: A Historical Perspective……………………………….9
2.6 Victim Compensation: Justice Principles………………………………...……10
3. Victim Compensation: Definition, Nature & Scope…………………………………....13
3.1 Compensation: Meaning and Definition………………………………...…….13
3.2 Justification for Victim Compensation…………………………………..…….15
4. Victim Compensation: Indian Position…………………………………………………17
4.1 Compensatory Provisions under Cr.P.C……………………………………....17
4.2 Compensation under Probation of Offenders Act……………………...……..19
4.3 Compensation to Victim under Motor Vehicle Act………………...…………19
4.4 Compensatory Relief to Victims – Judicial Trend……………………………19
5. Victim Compensation: International Position……………………………………...…..21
5.1 Victim Compensation Programmes in United States………………..………..21
5.2 Victim Compensation Programmes in UK………………………………...….22
5.3 Victim Compensation Measures at International Level…………….………..24
6. Suggestions and Recommendations……………………………………………….…….26
6.1 Law Commission’s Report…………………………………………………..…27
6.2 Malimath Committee Recommendations……………………………..……….27
7. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………...29

* Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………30

1|Page
 1. Introduction

There are various approaches of punishment like retributive, rehabilitative, reformative

etc. All these approaches focus on the offenders. They focus on punishing the offenders or to
rehabilitate and reform them to reintegrate them into the society etc. But they ignore the
actual justice to the victim as merely punishing an offender does not compensate the loss
suffered by the victim. Punishment is just a means to give satisfaction to the retributive
feelings of a victim but it actually does not provide him any material help. With this view in
consideration a new concept or a new reaction to crime has emerged, known as
Compensatory Jurisprudence. This is a concept of compensating the victim or his family for
the loss suffered due to the crime committed against him. In this project work we would be
discussing the concept of victim compensation.

1.1 Literature Review

Here, we would discuss the works of few scholars, briefly, who have tried to explain the
concept of victim compensation and blood money. According to Prof. Mehraj Uddin Mir,
victim compensation has become an important aspect of rendering justice to victims and
along with traditional notion of punishment compensation to victim has reduced the accused
oriented approach in the criminal justice system.1 Prof. Mir in his work compares the victim
compensation programmes in India, the USA and the UK, and concludes that though the
Indian position on victim compensation has positively changed during the last few decades
but this concept is more developed in USA and UK and India still has a long way to go.2 In
his work Prof. Mir though discusses the concept of victim compensation and the benefits to
the victim from the victim compensation scheme he does not say anything about its effects on
crime control. Thus he has discussed the things concentrating on victim and ignores the
offenders.
Frances L. Pierson talks about victim compensation through sentencing. He says that
victim compensation through sentencing benefits the offender, victim and the criminal justice
system. The offender experiences the rehabilitative effect of personally redressing his crime
and recognizes the human costs of his crime. The victim receives recognition of his injury

1
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta law
Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014.
2
Ibid.

2|Page
through the criminal process and receives a monetary award to compensate, at least as much
as money will allow, for his injuries.3
Abner J. Mikva provides for the need for a compensation program which operates
regardless of whether the criminal is caught or has financial resources.4 Thus he makes it the
responsibility of the state to compensate a victim and his work is totally victim oriented. He
does not discuss how it will affect the offender or how it is going to control crime.
Evan J. Mandery et. al give the concept of compensation for the victims of the criminal
justice system i.e. persons who are wrongfully convicted for the commission of offences.5
Their work raises the question what should be the definition of victim and should, in these
kinds of cases, state be included in the definition of offender?
Marlene A. Young says that victim compensation is a form of victim assistance in meeting
financial, physical, emotional and social needs of victims, and plays a vital role in victim
recovery.6 His work is also victim oriented and does not discuss how a criminal to be treated
in order to control crime.
Harvemyc Gregor, too, is victim oriented and provides that the object of an award of
damages is to compensate the plaintiff for his loss and not to punish the defendant for his
wrongdoing is a modern notion.7
Dr.B.M. Shukla in his work discusses the concept of victim compensation under the Indian
Criminal Law.8 He discusses the various legal provisions and powers of courts in this regard
and finally concludes that in India victim compensation is only a theoretical concept and is
just there on the papers and has no practicality. He gives various reasons for this problem but
does not consider the psychological perspective i.e. the concept of justice in Indian society
e.g. if for a society retribution is the real justice, then, obviously, compensation cannot give
the victims a mental satisfaction that justice is done and thus, it may have an impact on the
practicality of the concept of victim compensation.

3
Frances L. Pierson, Victim Compensation through Sentencing.
4
Abner J. Mikva, Victimless Justice, 71 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 189 (1980).
5
Evan J. Mandery, Amy Shlosberg, Valerie West, and Bennett Callaghan, Compensation Statutes and Post
exoneration Offending, 103 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 553 (2013).
6
Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives
7
Harvemyc Gregor, Compensation Versus Punishment in Damages Awards; Modern Law Review, 1965.
8
Dr.B.M Shukla, Victim Compensation under the Indian Criminal Law, Gujarat Law Herald, 18(1), 1998, p.45-
48

3|Page
1.2 Research Questions
o Who is a victim?
o Does the term victim include an offender also?
o Can the state be an offender?
o What is justice?
o Whether the justice is a relative concept or is absolute?
o Does, if yes how far, the psychology of the victim or the society affects the concept of
justice?
o What is victim compensation?
o How to decide the amount of compensation?
o Should it be the offender or the state to compensate the victim?
o How does compensation affect the offender?
o Does the Compensatory Jurisprudence play any role in controlling crime?
o What is the jurisprudence related to victim compensation in India?
o What is the jurisprudence in other countries? How much can India learn from the
same?
o What is the International legal mechanism related to victim compensation?

4|Page
 2. Victimology and Victim Compensation:
Philosophical Basis

Crime affects a large number of victims who suffer physical, social, financial or emotional
injury or harm which need to be promptly redressed by providing them easy access to justice.
Though the victims of crime 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. This concept of looking at crime from
the perspective of victims has emerged as an independent branch of criminology known as
victimology. In the present chapter we would be discussing the concept of victimology and
the philosophical basis of victimology and victim compensation.

2.1 Victimology – Definition & Meaning9

The term victimology was coined in 1947 by Benjamin Mendelsohn. It can be defined as
the scientific study of victimization, including the relationships between victims and
offenders, the interactions between the victims and the criminal justice system; that is, the
police and courts, and correctional officials. It also includes connections between victims and
other social groups and institutions, such as the media, businesses and social movements.
However, the term victimology is not restricted to the study of crime-victims alone but it may
extend to other forms of human rights violations that are not necessarily crimes.10
The term ‘victim’ in general parlance refers to all those who experience injury, loss or
hardship due to any cause and one of such cause may be crime. Therefore, victimology may
be defined as a study of people who experience injury or hardship due to any cause. Such
injury or harm may be physical, psychological, emotional or financial. It therefore, follows
that ‘victim of crime’ is the person who has suffered at the hands of perpetrator of crime.11
The study of victims of crime and specially the reasons why some people are more vulnerable
9
Andrew Karman, Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology (2003) p. 7.
10
Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law Publications, p.663.
11
Ibid.

5|Page
to victimization than others constitutes the core subject of study for victimologits around the
world.12
While defining ‘victim of crime’ different approaches can be seen in both criminological
and victimological literature. One approach is to limit the concept to victims of traditional
crimes such as murder, rape, robbery, burglary etc. However, it has also been proposed to
include a broader definition of the concept by covering groups such as prisoners, immigrants,
subjects of medical experimentation and persons charged with crime but not proved guilty.13
As per definition of victim by the U.N. Declaration of 1985,
“Victim 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 law operating within the member states including those laws
prescribing criminal abuse of power. A person may be considered as victim,
irrespective of whether the perpetrator is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or
convicted or irrespective of the familial relationship between the perpetrator and the
victim. The term victim also includes, where appropriate the immediate family or
dependents of the direct victim and persons who have suffered harm in intervening to
assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization. The provisions are applicable to
everyone irrespective of race, age, color, nationality, religion, language, political and
other affiliation, cultural belief or practices, property birth or family status, ethnic or
social origin disability and nationality.”14
Therefore, victim means the person or persons who have suffered financial, social,
psychological or physical harm as a result of an offence, and includes in the case of any
homicide, an appropriate member of the immediate family of any such person.15
In response to the UN Declaration of 1985, in India the Code of Criminal Procedure was
amended in 2008 and the expression ‘victim of crime’ has been defined in Section 2(WA)16
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This Section defines victim as:
“The term 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
includes his/her guardian or legal heir.”
12
Rachel Matison, Criminal Victimization, the World Society of Victimology (No.30 of 2009).
13
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.5.
14
UN Declaration of the Basic Principles of Justice for the Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, 1985.
15
Definition given in the report of Malimath Committee at p. 82.
16
Sec. 2(WA) inserted by CrPC Amendment Act, 2008 (w.e.f.31-12-2009)

6|Page
 Victimology has now emerged as a branch of criminology dealing exclusively with the
victims of crime who need to be treated with compassion and rendered compensation and
assistance under the criminal justice system. While criminology is concerned mainly with the
causation of crime, victimology is primarily concerned with the study as to why people fall a
victim to crime and how they can be helped and assisted against abuse of power or criminal
acts of offenders through access to criminal justice system. The study also outlines the steps
to be taken to prevent victimization against crimes and provide legal remedies to the victims
of crime.17

2.2 Victimology – Historical Perspective

The origin of victimology as a part of criminology may be traced back to 1940’s when
founders of this branch of knowledge, notably, Mendelsohn, Von Henting and Wolfgang
initially tended to use the term to mean “hapless dupes who instigated their own
victimization” which they termed as ‘victim precipitation’.18
However, the notion of “victim precipitation” invoked criticism by feminists by 1980’s
and the term victim was interpreted in a wider sense to include “anyone caught up in an
asymmetric relationship or situation”. The word ‘asymmetry’ connotes anything imbalanced,
exploitative, parasitical, oppressive, disturbing and alienating or having inherent suffering.
Thus, in the modern sense, the concept of victimology includes any person who experiences
injury, loss or hardship due to any cause. The term may be used in many forms such as
accident victims, flood victims, famine victims, tsunami victims, blast victims, cancer victims
and so on. The common element in all of them is some kind of suffering, injury or harm
caused by forces beyond victim’s control.19

2.3 Theoris of Victimology

With the advance of victimological studies, the theory of victim precipitation came to be
perceived as a negative approach to victim because it only focused on how victim’s own
contribution led to his victimization. Therefore, most of the criminologists refuse to accept
this theory, it being destructive in nature.20

17
Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law Publications, p.663.
18
Id. at 663-64.
19
Id. at 664.
20
Ibid.

7|Page
 Marvin Wolfgang, who opposed the theory of ‘victim precipitation’, believed in the
phenomenon, of ’victim facilitation’ rather than ‘victim blaming’. He did not blame the
victim but asserted that the interactions of the victim make him/her vulnerable to a crime.
Thus, the idea behind victim facilitation is to study the elements that make victim more
accessible or vulnerable to a crime attack.21
Benjamin Meldelsohn propounded a three model theory of victimology and observed that
the conditions that precipitate crime can be classified into three general categories as follows:
1) In terms of time and space, the victim being in the wrong place at a wrong time.
2) Attracting factors and life-style also create a fertile ground for incidence of crime.
3) There are certain pre-disposing factors such as being too young, being too poor, being
in minority, being unemployed etc. which may lead to the victimization of a person to
crime.22
Later, Cohen and Felson (1979) came out with their ‘Routine Activities Theory’, which
pre-supposes that a crime occurs when three conditions come together, namely (i) suitable
target (ii) motivated offender (iii) absence of security or parental care or guardianship.23
Earlier, when criminology was in its emerging stage, victimology simply meant study of
crime from the perspective of the victim. Mendelsohn and Von Hentig were the first to
explore the possibility of developing victimology as an independent branch of criminology
and therefore, they are considered as the ‘father of victimology’.24
To begin with, Von Hentig concentrated on the study of behaviours and vulnerabilities of
victims of crime, such as resistance of rape victims or victims of murder. He concluded that
crime victims were mostly ‘depressive type’ who fell an easy target to crime due to their own
carelessness.25
The modern trend is to study victimology as a multi disciplinary subject. It is not only
focused on victims of crime but also encompasses within it, the study of victims of traffic
hazards, natural disasters, war crimes, abuse of power, corruption etc. The professionals
involved in victimological studies may, therefore, be legal practitioners, judges, policy
makers, law teachers etc.26

21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
Id. at 664-65.
25
Id. at 665.
26
Ibid.

8|Page
2.4 Victim Compensation
The compensation to victim of crime is a matter of concern, throughout the world the
condition of the victims of crime is no better. For a quite long time the victim was not the
concern for traditional criminology. The function of compensation is straightforward.
Compensation serves to right what would otherwise count as wrongful injuries to persons or
their property.27
The evolution of victim compensation was a key factor in the victim assistance movement.
Part of the problem in perception might be traced to the fact that much has been written
through these years about structure and function of victim compensation. But little attention
has been paid to the fact that victim compensation is a form of victim assistance in meeting
financial, physical, emotional and social needs of victims, and has played a vital role in
victim recovery. Even less attention has been paid to the possible role victim compensation
can have in future victim assistance efforts.28

2.5 Victim Compensation: A Historical Perspective

The idea of victim compensation can be traced back as early as the Babylonian
civilization before 2380 B.C.29 in Ancient Babylonia, the Hummurabi code specifies that:
“If a man has committed robbery and is caught, that man shall be put to death. If the
robber is not caught, the man who has been robbed shall formally declare what he
has lost... and the city… shall replace whatever he has lost for him. if it is the life of
the owner that is lost, the city or the mayor shall pay one maneh of silver to his
kinsfolk.”(Sections 22-24)30
In the early Common Law of Middle England, if a man was murdered, the man’s family
was entitled to a werguild of four pounds. Gradually, however as the criminal justice system
was separated from civil proceedings, state reparations began to subside and the state became
primarily responsible for imposing punishment based not only on harm done to individual
victims but also harm done to the King or Feudal Lord.31

27
Robert E. Goodin, Theories of Compensation, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 9, 1989, p. 56.
28
Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives, p. 1.
29
Prof. Mehraj Uddin Mi,: Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.2.
30
Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives, p. 1.
31
C.R. Jeffery. “The developments of crime in early English Society,” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology
and Police Science, 47, 6 (March-April 1957).

9|Page
 Eleventh century has been referred by Stephen Schafer (1968) as the ‘golden age’32 of the
victim because victims exercised such an important role in the criminal justice process, which
centered on the reparation of the victim. Interestingly, reparation of the victim was according
to Schafer, an indication of how evolved a society was. For example, the Saxons and the
Germans introduced the use of ‘wergald’, which meant that they renounced a vendetta after a
serious bodily injury, provided that the offender compensated the victim or his family. The
agreement between the victim (or the victim’s clan) put an end to any further violence.33 But
the thirteenth century witnessed the decline of victim’s role and was dominated by the notion
that crime was primarily a social threat rather than a harm done against an individual. After
that the responsibility of victim was taken by the state and position of victim got
marginalized in the criminal justice system. Resultantly, the system of paying compensation
to the victim was replaced by the offender paying compensation to the state. This practice
still exists today and is referred to as fine. With the emergence of victimology in the 19th
century mainly because of the studies of Benjamin Mendelsohn and Hans Von Hentig, the
pioneers in victimology, plight of crime victims was again brought forth by describing them
as forgotten entity in the criminal justice system.34
The last few decades have seen an unprecedented rise in interest in the victim by
politicians, criminal justice policy makers and a diverse range of scholars in feminism,
criminology, victimology, sociology, law and public policy. Organized victim movement
began to appear in the UK, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand between the 1970s
and early 1980s.35

2.6 Victim Compensation: Justice Principles

There also has been some discussion of the goals of victim compensation. Initially there
was little agreement on what the goals should be defined. Two early authors reflecting upon
major justifications suggested four principal goals: “social welfare, social contract, symbolic,
and instrumental.”36

32
Bajpai, G. S., Criminal Justice System Reconsidered, Victim and Witness Perspectives (2012) p. 2.
33
Ibid.
34
Prof. Mehraj Uddin Mir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.2-3.
35
Walklate, S., Handbook of Victims and Victimology (2007) p. 380.
36
D. Chappell and L. P. Sutton. “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Programs to Compensate the Victims of
Crime,” in Victimology: A New Focus, Volume II, Society’s Reaction to Victimology, I. Drapkin and E. Viano,
eds. Lexington Books: Lexington, MA (1974).

10 | P a g e
 Interestingly, each of these justifications was used in those early years for responding to
the needs of victims. Initially, the social welfare goal was one of the most commonly cited,
particularly in the United States. It is reflected in former Justice Goldberg’s comment: “In a
fundamental sense, then, one who suffers the impact of criminal violence is also the victim of
society’s long inattention to poverty and social injustice…”37 It is also reflected in early
legislation in which compensation was established as a “matter of grace,” not a matter of
right.38
The second theory for state compensation programs was based on the social contract
stemming from Jeremy Bentham’s argument:
“Has a crime been committed? Those who have suffered by it, either in their person or their
fortune, are abandoned to their evil condition. The society which they have contributed to
maintain, and which ought to protect them, owes them, however, an indemnity when its
protection has not been effectual.”39 The thinking was that a person’s natural right to avenge
wrongs done to him or her should be subordinated to society’s larger interest in serving as the
individual’s protector from harm, or, failing that, as the instrument of consistent and fair-
minded justice. Still, society may not justly “steal” one’s natural right of self-protection or
vengeance, but rather it must either perform as a protector or pay as avenger.40
While this justification has never been completely embraced – since it would imply a legal
argument to compensate all victims of crime as well a legal obligation to fully compensate
for all damages – it has to considerable extent become the basis for arguments today that seek
compensation as a partial source of a justice response to victims. It is significant that virtually
all state compensation laws in the United States include a right to compensation. Denmark,
England, Wales and Scotland also consider that “a victim of a violent offence in principle has
a right to state compensation.”41
The third possible justification scheme was based on the symbolic value of victims. This is
probably the least examined issue raised by compensation. In the early years of modern
compensation, it was often rejected as demeaning to victims since it would serve as a placebo
in place of “real” and effective reparations that could help victims recover financially.
However, as this paper will argue, the more that is learned about the emotional aftermath of

37
A.J. Goldberg. Preface: Symposium on Governmental Compensation for Victims of Violence. Southern
California Law Review 43 (1970)
38
Cf. New York Executive Law #620 (McKinney’s, 1972)
39
The Works of Jeremy Bentham. New York: Russell and Russelll, 1962, p. 589
40
Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives, p. 2.
41
E. Hoegen and Mario Brienen, Victims of Crime in 22 European Criminal Justice Systems. Wolf Legal
Productions: The Netherlands (2000)

11 | P a g e
victimization and role of social response, it may still be one of the most valuable effects of
compensation to many victims.42
The fourth goal of compensation addressed the instrumental functions within the criminal
justice system that compensation would serve. There was an early notion that state
compensation programs would encourage participation by victims in reporting crime,
assisting with investigations, and participating in prosecution. There has been little evidence
that this is the case. If victims do not want to participate or cooperate, then they do not apply
– indeed may not apply – for compensation. There may be a few victims for whom the
financial inducement was enough to sustain their cooperation – “sustain” since the crimes
against all potentially eligible victims were known to the police, which usually mean the
victim reported the crime and thus were initially cooperative. Yet, there is only rare anecdotal
evidence that a victim continued to cooperate with the justice system to preserve their
compensation right.43

42
Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives, p. 3.
43
Ibid.

12 | P a g e
 3. Victim Compensation:
Definition, Nature & Scope

Victimology is not confined now in studying the penal couple relation only. The
compensation to victim is also gaining importance. A person sustaining injuries or his
dependants in case of his death may be provided compensation. In certain primitive societies
and in medieval period the compensation was given to the victim or his family by the
offender or the clan to which he belonged. The wrong doer may not be competent enough to
provide the compensation and so the need arises of the state responsibility to pay
compensation.

3.1 Compensation: Meaning and Definition

Ubi jus, ibi remedium is the basic principle in the tort that states that there is no wrong
without a remedy and the rule of law requires that wrongs should not remain unredressed.
The compensation constitutes an important remedial measure in tort law and the principles
relating to the determination of damages and compensation in tort are well established. There
are several dimensions to the issue of payment of damages and compensation in the law
relating to torts includes the measure of damages, quantum of damages, assessment of
damages, intention of the wrongdoer, proximity of the cause etc.44 Under the Tort law, in
order to claim compensation the tort must be of such a nature as will entitle the plaintiff to
recover damages. Where, therefore, the case is of a nature which:45
a) does not give rise to a right to the plaintiff to recover damages, or to the existence of
the liability of the defendant, as where the defendant has committed no wrong,
whether a breach of contract or a tort, or
b) does not occasion any loss or damage, or no cause of action accrues to the plaintiff, as
when he himself is at fault or the damages are too remote, or he has failed to mitigate
his damages.
Compensation cannot be granted.

44
Mundrathi, S., Law on Compensation- To Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power 182, Deep and Deep
Publications, New Delhi, (2007) p.9.
45
Ibid.

13 | P a g e
Thus, the plaintiff cannot recover that part of the loss46
a) which is due to his own contributory negligence; or
b) of which the defendant’s conduct is not the cause; or
c) which is not within the scope of the protection of the particular contract or tort; or
d) which he should have avoided or mitigated; or
e) which is too uncertain; or
f) which is past or prospective, that is, is too remote.

However, the term “Compensation” in present context means amends for the loss
sustained. Compensation is anything given to make things equivalent, a thing given to make
amends for loss, recompense, remuneration or pay.47 It is a sign of responsibility of the
society which is civil in nature representing a non-criminal purpose and end.48 Compensation,
as distinct from damages is used in relation to a wrongful act, which cause the injury.49
Literally, compensation means the money which is given to compensate for loss or injury,
whole purpose of compensation is to make good the losses sustained by the victim of crime
or by the legal representative of the deceased or who has suffered of pecuniary loss or non
pecuniary loss. Compensation to the victims of crime means something given in recompense
i.e. equivalent rendered. It is to be note that the whole purpose of compensation is to make
good the loss sustained by the victim or legal representative of the deceased. Generally the
term compensation limits itself to monetary compensation which is calculated on the basis of
two head i.e. pecuniary loss and non-pecuniary loss.50
According to Oxford dictionary,51 “Compensation means to provide something good to
balance or reduce the bad effect of damage, loss, injury etc”. According to Black’s Law
Dictionary,52 “Compensation means payment of damages, or any other act that court orders to
be done by a person who has caused injury to another and must therefore make the other
whole.”

46
Id. at 10.
47
State of Gujarat v. Shantilal, AIR 1969 SC 634 at 644.
48
Devasia, V.V. and Devasia, L. Criminology, Victimology and Corrections 97, Ashish Publishing House
(1992)
49
General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport v. Saradhamma, 1987ACCJ 926 Kerala
50
Randhawa, G.S., Victimology and Compensatory Jurisprudence 166-167, Central Law Publications,
Allahabad (2011)
51
Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 5th Ed. (1996)
52
Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th Ed., St. Paul, Minn., (1999)

14 | P a g e
 In criminal-victim relationships, compensation concerns in making amends to him; or,
perhaps, it is simply compensation for the damage or injury caused by a crime against him.53
As commonly understood it carries with it the idea of making whole, or giving an equivalent,
to one party and has no relation to any advantage to the other.54 It is counterbalancing of the
victim’s sufferings and loss that result from victimization. It is a sign of responsibility a non-
criminal purpose and end.55
Crime victim compensation is a government program to reimburse victims of violent
crimes- such as assault, homicide, rape, and, in some states, burglary - as well as their
families for many of their out-of-pocket expenses. Every state has a crime victim
compensation program.56

3.2 Justification for Victim Compensation

Victim compensation is a novel idea and if successfully meted out it retains the equity
between the injured and the injurer. Victim’s ego gets satisfied and he feels sense of
belongingness and security in the society. The modern world has almost discouraged the
reimbursement to the victim by offender or his family because the state sponsored
punishment supplanted victim and family reparations. The restitution has replaced by
punishment.57 As justice should not only be done but it must be seen to have been done,
therefore according to punishment to the offender or violator of the rights be it may legal
rights, fundamental rights or human rights, of an individual is just the former part of justice
i.e. the justice has been done by punishing the culprit. But the later part that it must be seen to
have been done still requires something more to be done. It requires just not only punishment
to the accused but caring for the victim and protection of his rights and supporting him in
times of distress. The idea of victim and compensation to such victim is not new but was
existing in the ancient time, which got lost in the later period when the state emerged
focusing primarily on retribution on behalf of a victim by itself. The later criminal justice
system due to its’ over emphasis on the offender and his rights, lost right of the victims. After
Independence, we the people of India devised for our self and excellent piece of state craft in

53
Schafer, S. Introduction to Criminology 162, Reston Publishing Company Inc. (1976)
54
Mundrathi, S., Law on Compensation- To Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power 182, Deep and Deep
Publications, New Delhi, (2007) at 2.
55
Devasia, V.V. and Devasia, L. Criminology, Victimology and Corrections 97, Ashish Publishing House
(1992) at 98.
56
https://victimsofcrime.org/help-for-crime-victims/get-help-bulletins-for-crime-victims/crime-victim-
compensation, accessed on 4-5-2016.
57
Rai, H.S. “Compensation Jurisprudence and Victims of Crime” 334, Cr.L.J, (2004).

15 | P a g e
the form of constitution of India, wherein due to the commitment to the human dignity, we
classified certain rights as fundamental rights was done and granting of power to the various
wings governing “we the people” under the expectation that they shall never toy with these
basic rights, took place. Apart from it, India became signatory to various international
covenants and conventions with regard to the human rights which also warrant the state to
take care of the human rights and other rights mentioned therein which are primarily
indispensable so far as the human being is concerned.58

58
Ibid.

16 | P a g e
 4. Victim Compensation:
Indian Position

The legislative framework regarding compensatory relief to victims of crime in India may
be traced to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 also contain provisions for award of compensation to victims of
crime.

4.1 Compensatory Provisions under Cr.P.C.

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has empowered the criminal courts in India for the
payment of compensation to the victims of crime under different provisions. Section 357 is
the main provision dealing with compensatory provisions. Section 545 of the old Criminal
Procedure dealt with the same subject-matter though it was somewhat narrower in scope.

Section 357(1) lays down inter alia:59

“Whenever under any law in force for the time being a criminal court imposes a
fine… or a sentence (including a sentence to death) of which fine forms a part, the
court may, when passing judgment, order the whole or any part of the fine recovered
to be applied:
a) In defraying expenses properly incurred in the prosecution;
b) In the payment to any person of compensation for any loss or injury caused by
the offence when compensation is, in the opinion of the court, recoverable by
such person in a civil court;
c) When any person is convicted of any offence for having caused the death of
another. Another person of having abetted the commission of such an offence
in paying compensation to persons who are, under the Fatal Accidents Act,
1855, entitled to recover damages from the person sentenced for the loss
resulting to them from such death.”60

59
Mishra, S.N., the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2008) p.484.
60
Under Sec. 1A (b) of the Act, husband, wife, parents and children are entitled to compensation.

17 | P a g e
 Sub-section (3) of Section 357 was added, as recommended by the Law Commission in its
Forty-first Report, in the new Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 and it provides:
“When a court imposes a sentence of which fine does not form a part, the court may,
when passing judgment, order the accused person to pay, by way of compensation
such amount as may be specified in the order, to the person who has suffered any loss
or injury by reasons of the act for which the accused person has been sentenced.”

The court has very limited discretion under Section 357 (1); it can give compensation only
out of the fine if imposed on the offender, quantum of compensation is limited to the fine
levied, compensation to the victim under this section can be allowed by the court if it is of the
opinion that the compensation is recoverable by such person in a civil suit. The court has
however, much more discretion under sub-section (3) of Section 357; though only if fine does
not form a part of the sentence.61 Theoretically, the power of the court is unlimited, though
practical considerations would prevail. A magistrate can order for higher compensation than
the amount of fine he can impose.62
Similarly, Section 358 empowers a magistrate to order a person to pay compensation not
exceeding one thousand rupees to another person for causing a police officer to arrest such
other person wrongfully. Likewise, Section 359 of Criminal Procedure Code relates to an
order to pay costs in non-cognizable cases.63
It is evident that only marginal action is possible under Section 357 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to compensate the victims of crime and this fact has been testified by
various constraints and limitations. Some of such constraints include, dependence on the
paying capacity of the offender which acts as a bar against the victim getting any
compensation. There is a general reluctance on the part of the criminal courts regarding the
use of the criminal law process for compensation purposes, coupled with the indifference and
even ignorance on the part of lawyers and clients and many opportunities are lost because of
their default. The courts are reluctant to impose fine along with substantial imprisonment in
serious offences and the scope of fine in any case is very limited in terms of quantum in
minor offences. Maximum fines have been laid down for various offences which were fixed a
long time ago and their monetary value must now be a very small fraction of what they might
have been at the time when these fines were introduced in the Penal Code. Conviction is

61
Mohammad Ashraf,”Status of Crime-Victims in the Indian Criminal Justice”’ KULR (2010) Vol. 17, p.160.
62
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.9.
63
Ibid.

18 | P a g e
necessary for the payment of compensation. As is well known, conviction may not be
possible in many cases irrespective of the merits of the case.64

4.2 Compensation under Probation of Offenders Act

The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 also contains provisions for compensatory relief to
victim of crime under Section 5(1) of the Act. The Section provides that the court directing
the release of an offender under Section 3 or Section 4 of the Act, may if it deems fit, further
direct the accused to pay such compensation to the victim, as the court thinks reasonable for
the loss or injury caused to the latter, as also the costs of the proceedings.65

4.3 Compensation to Victim under Motor Vehicle Act

The victims of vehicular accidents or their legal representatives in case of death of the
victim are entitled to claim compensation from the offender under Section 5 of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988. However, the power in this regard is vested only with the trial court and
none else.66

4.4 Compensatory Relief to Victims – Judicial Trend

The contribution of judiciary to redress the claims of victims of crime is no less
significant. The higher courts have played a dominant role in assuring compensatory justice
to the victims of crime. While awarding such compensatory relief, they have exercised due
care and caution to ensure that people’s faith in judicial process is not shattered and the
victims protective rights are not denied to them. Some of the landmark judgments of the
Supreme Court ensuring restorative justice to victims of crime reflect the growing concern of
judiciary to protect the rights of victims.67
Elaborating the scope of award of compensation to victim of crime under Section 358 of
Cr.P.C., Justice V.Y. Chandrachud CJI (as he then was), in Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar68,
observed that a person is entitled to compensation for the loss or injury caused by the offence,
and it includes the wife, husband, parent and children of the deceased victim.

64
Sidiqui Ahmad, Qadri S.M.A., Criminology and Penology (2009) p. 607.
65
Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law Publications, p.680.
66
Ibid.
67
Id. at 680-81.
68
AIR 1983 SC 1086.

19 | P a g e
 The Apex Court in Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab69, enumerated the factors which the
courts should take into consideration while ordering award of compensation to victim of
crime. these factors include capacity of the accused to pay, nature of the offence and the
nature of injury suffered by the victim as also the overall effect of crime on the victim’s
familial and social life and emotional or financial loss caused to him/her. The Court ruled that
the quantum of compensation must be reasonable, depending the facts, circumstances and
justness of victim’s claim. The accused must be given reasonable time for payment of
compensation and if necessary, it may be ordered to be paid in instatements.70
In yet another landmark case on victim’s compensatory relief, namely, D.K. Basu v. State
of West Bengal71, the Supreme Court, inter alia made the following observation:
“The monetary and pecuniary compensation is an appropriate and indeed an effective
and sometimes perhaps the only suitable remedy for the redressal of the established
infringement of the fundamental right to life of a citizen by the public servants. The
state is vicariously liable to which the defence of sovereign immunity is not available
and the citizen must receive the amount of compensation from the state; which shall
have the right to be indemnified from the wrongdoer.”

In the case of SAHELI72 (a women social activist organisation) the Apex Court directed
the Delhi Administration to pay Rs. 75,000/- as exemplary compensation to the mother of a
nine year old boy who died due to beating by police officer while extracting information from
him regarding the offence.

69
AIR 2000 SC 362.
70
Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law Publications, p.681.
71
AIR 1997 SC 610.
72
SAHELI V. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, AIR 1990 SC 513.

20 | P a g e
 5. Victim Compensation:
International Position

In this chapter we will discuss the position of victim compensation at International level.
There are a number of countries that have adopted legislations to regulate the victim
compensation. They have a separate legal setup focusing on the victim compensation. Even
special funds are maintained by the States for compensating the victims.

5.1 Victim Compensation Programmes in United States

As for as compensation scheme in United States of America is concerned, California was
the first state to introduce laws to compensate victims of violent crimes in 1965 and as of
now, 45 of the 50 States have such programmes. The remedies are through private insurance,
public assistance programmes and restitution. Most statutes insist on the victim’s cooperation
with the police to make him eligible for compensation. The crime must be reported to the
police within a prescribed period after its occurrence. Apart from the persons who are injured
or killed as a result of crime, those who suffer injuries while preventing a crime being
committed or apprehending a criminal or helping a victim or enforcement officer are also
eligible for compensation.73

The compensation programmes are administered through the following offices74:

a. An administrative agency especially created for the purpose.
b. An existing machinery like the one dealing with workmen’s compensation.
c. Courts of law.

The scheme has been extended in a majority of States to the victims of drunken driving
and in a few States also to those who continue to live with the offenders after becoming
victims of domestic violence. The number of eligible persons receiving the compensation is
going up gradually and it is possible that in a few years perhaps as many as half of the
eligible victims will receive state compensation. Extension of eligibility even to persons who

73
Siddiqui Ahmad, Qadri S.M.A., Criminology and Penology (2009) p. 602.
74
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.17.

21 | P a g e
may not be victims of direct and violent crimes is the current trend in some of the European
countries, viz. Sweden, Austria, Finland and France.75 Legislations empowering courts to
order compensation by the offender to the victim have been passed in all the states and
reasons are to be recorded when the compensation order is not passed.76

Another important victim related legislation in U.S. is Victim of Crimes Act, passed
in 1984. This Act established ‘crime victims fund’ made up of federal criminal fines,
penalties and bond forfeitures, to support state victim compensation and local victim
service programs. Good amount of money is collected in this way for victim’s help.77

It may very safely be concluded that the victim is no longer a forgotten man in the U.S.
criminal justice system and his rights are almost on par with that of the accused.

5.2 Victim Compensation Programmes in UK

In Britain victims have either to rely upon the court to make a compensation order or to
make claims against the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. Unlike jurisdictions like
France or Germany where victims have the right to pursue civil claims for compensation
within the criminal process, in Britain compensation is payable by the offender as an
ancillary order to the main penalty in cases where ‘injury, loss or damage’ has resulted under
the Criminal Justice Act, 1972.78
Ministry of Justice Business plan for 2011-15 includes a specific commitment to ‘ensure
better reparation to victims’. Compensation orders can be made in respect of personal injury;
losses through theft of, or damage to, property; losses through fraud; loss of earnings,
medical expenses; travelling expenses; and pain and suffering; even the Criminal Justice Act,
2003 makes it possible to order compensation pre-trial under conditional cautions. In 2009
total amount of compensation awarded was 29.1 million pounds, paid by 48176 offenders
(only 14.7%) of all those sentenced, suggesting that there is a considerable scope to radically
increase the use of compensation orders, although the court must take account of the
offenders’ circumstances and ability to pay.79

75
Siddiqui Ahmad, Qadri S.M.A., Criminology and Penology (2009) p. 603.
76
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.18.
77
Ibid.
78
Maguire, M., Morgan, R., and Reiner, R., The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2012) p.410.
79
Ibid.

22 | P a g e
 Compensations are also paid in the UK under the Criminal Injuries Compensation
Scheme, 1964. Under Criminal Justice Act of 1972 the idea of payment of compensation by
the offender was introduced. The Criminal Justice Act, 1982 made it possible for the first
time to make a compensation order a sole penalty. It also required that in cases where fines
and compensation orders were given together, the payment of compensation should take
priority over the fine.80 A Criminal Injuries Compensation Board was constituted which was
later transformed into a statutory body under the Criminal Justice Act of 1988. The basis of
quantum of compensation is the same as that of damages in civil injuries and the money
payable is for pain and suffering, loss of earning capacity and out-of-pocket expenses. Under
the revised scheme of 1973, it is now possible to give compensation for injuries caused by
one family member to another.81
The cost involved in implementing the programme is enormous. In the UK, a sum of
approximately six million pounds sterling was paid in 1976 as compensation for 16,000
claims and there is an annual increase of 15 per cent in the costs. Administrative expenditure
itself accounts for 11 per cent of the disbursements. In an attempt to curb the spiraling cost of
payments and improve administrative efficiency, traffic scheme – grouping injuries of
comparable severity into 25 bands – was introduced under the Criminal Injuries
Compensation Act, 1995. Owing to the criticism faced by the scheme on the grounds like
unduly limiting maximum awards excluding consideration of the complexities of individual
cases, an updated scheme was introduced in 2001 with minor modifications. Further, the
scheme was revised in 2008 which inter-alia allowed compensation for mental injury. But the
fixed tariff system remains, with, for example, the standard lump sum payment of 11,000
pounds when the primary victim has died as a result of criminal injuries (with no discretion to
alter this sum).82
The following conditions must be satisfied for making a victim eligible to receive
compensation in the UK:83
There must have been a prosecution regarding the offence against the victim; the
conditions can be waived off for practical, technical and other good reasons only.

80
Maguire, M., Morgan, R., and Reiner, R., The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2002) p.419. Ankush
Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 6 SCC, p.786. As quoted in Oxford Handbook of Criminology
(1994) pp.1237-38.
81
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.19.
82
Maguire, M., Morgan, R., and Reiner, R., The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2012) p.411.
83
Sidiqui Ahmad, Qadri S.M.A., Criminology and Penology (2009) p.602.

23 | P a g e
 Injury must be of such a nature as would entitle the victim to a damage of at least five
hundred pounds.
1. Where the victim and the offender happen to be of the same family, the Board must
be satisfied that there was no likelihood of their living together and that they stopped
living together before the application was made for compensation.
2. If the victim or the person claiming on his behalf is less than 18, compensation is to
be paid only if the Board is satisfied that it would not be against the interest of the
minor to make a full or reduce award.
3. There is no compensation payable in property offences.

The Criminal Justice Act of the UK provides that if a court contemplates to impose both
fine and compensation order, and the offender lacks the capacity for both the payments, the
court is to issue a compensation order only.84

5.3 Victim Compensation Measures at International Level

At the international level the important duty of criminal justice system towards the
victims of crime was neglected until Victimologists and victim advocates collectively voiced
through the initiative of World Society of Victimology, 1979 and spearheaded the cause of
victims and their rights in the criminal justice system.85 Recognizing that the rights of victims
had not been adequately addressed, the General Assembly of United Nations, in 1985,
adopted the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of crime and abuse of
power (Victims’ Declaration) and it became a ‘Magna Carta’ for the victims broadly
emphasizing four important rights namely, access to justice, restitution, compensation and
assistance to victims of crime and abuse of power. The importance of including provisions
whereby offenders may compensate the victims for their wrong doings have been duly
recognized in this declaration in the following words:86
“Offenders or third parties responsible for their behaviour, should, where
appropriate, make restitutions to the victim, their families or dependents. Such
restitution should include the return of property or payment for the harm or loss

84
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.21.
85
Rajkumar, C., Chockalingam, K., Human Rights, Justice and Constitutional empowernment (2007) p.444.
86
Mohd. Ashraf,”Status of Crime-Victims in the Indian Criminal Justice”, Kashmir University Law Review,
Vol. xvii, p.156.

24 | P a g e
 suffered, reimbursement of expenses incurred as a result of the victimization, the
provision of services and the restoration of right”.

The declaration of 1985 recognised the following rights of victims of crime in which
compensation to crime victims is one important right:87
1) Access to justice and fair treatment:
This right includes the mechanisms of justice and to promote redress, right to be
informed of victims’ rights, right to proper assistance throughout the legal process and
right to protection of privacy and safety.

2) Restitution:
This right includes return of property for the harm or loss suffered; where public
officials or other agents have violated criminal laws, the victims should receive
restitution from the state.

3) Compensation:
When compensation is not fully available from the offender or other sources, the state
should provide financial compensation, at least in violent crimes which result in
bodily injury, for which national funds should be established.

4) Assistance:
Victims should receive necessary material, medical, psychological and community
based means. Police, justice, health and social service personnel should receive
training in this regard.

More recently an International Association called The South Asian Society of

Criminology and Victimolgy (SASCV) has been founded in February, 2011 to nurture and
promote criminological and victimological knowledge in South Asian Countries such as
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Pakistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Nepal. Here,
again emphasis is in victim’s restorative justice, both at the Governmental and the non
Governmental level.88

87
Bajpai, G.S., Criminal Justice System Reconsidered (Victim and Witness Perspectives) (2012) p.75.
88
Prof. Mehraj Uddin Mir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.23.

25 | P a g e
 6. Suggestions & Recommendations

Upon making a comparative analysis, it is reflected that Indian position on victim

compensation has positively changed during the last few decades. While comparing Indian
position with the countries where victim concerns regarding compensation are more
developed particularly in UK or USA some suggestions can be concluded as under:89
ß A comprehensive victim compensation legislation should be made just like in USA or
UK.
ß A greater level of victim participation in the Indian Criminal Justice system is
required. Evolving concepts like Victim Impact Statement as is present in USA, will
increase victim’s participation.
ß A Victim Impact Statement will contain the following:
i) The physical, psychological or emotional impact of the crime.
ii) The harm done to family relationship by the crime, such as the loss of a parent and
caregiver.
iii) The need for restitution.
iv) The victim’s opinion of an appropriate sentence of an offender.
ß Another important measure to be adopted in India is to make compensation a statutory
right, with a provision mandating that the judges have to record reason for not
awarding compensation.
ß State Constituted Victim Assistance Fund can be considered as ready and immediate
relief which inter-alia can help in preventing further victimization.
ß Establishment of Acts like Victim of Crime Act (VOCA) 1984 of USA to provide
assistance to the “victim assistance efforts” or to “state victim compensation
programmes” in the form of providing subsidies etc. can be viewed as a welcome step
to be adopted in India.

89
Prof. Mehraj Uddin Mir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.23-26.

26 | P a g e
6.1 Law Commission’s Report
Fourteenth Law Commission of India in its 154th report on the Criminal Procedure Code
while expressing its deep concern for the crime victims had suggested a comprehensive
victim compensation scheme particularly for those of custodial crimes, rapes, child-abuse etc.
to be administered on the recommendations of a trial court by the legal services authorities
constituted at the district and state levels under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.90
The report observed:
“…In India the principles of compensation to crime victims need to be reviewed and
expanded to cover all cases. The compensation should not be limited only to fines,
penalties and forfeitures realized. The state should accept the principle of providing
assistance to victims out of its own funds…”91

6.2 Malimath Committee Recommendations

Regarding victim compensation the Malimath Committee has recommended that:92
“Victim compensation is a state obligation in all serious crimes, whether the offender
is apprehended or not, convicted or acquitted. This is to be organized 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 committee has also recommended that:93

“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 for 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.”

It should be understood that victimology and justice for victims of crime is not exclusively
a legal problem, it also has sociological, psychological, financial and ethical implications

90
Available at http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/libweb/commission/law_commission.
91
Prakash Chandra Mishra,”Victim Compensation Scheme: An Aspect of Modern Criminology”, Criminal Law
Journal (2014) Vol. 120, pp. 142-43.
92
Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A Comparative Analysis, Vitasta
law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014, p.11.
93
Ibid.

27 | P a g e
which need to be addressed jointly by experts working in these fields adopting a multi-
disciplinary approach. A community based joint Victim Impact Panel on the American
pattern may be constituted comprising lawyers, judges, sociologists, psychologists, women
activists, politicians etc. to decide victim’s rights and claims and their rehabilitation in the
society.94

94
Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law Publications, p.683.

28 | P a g e
 7. Conclusion

Victim compensation has now become an important aspect of rendering justice to victims.
Along with traditional notion of punishment, compensation to victim has reduced the accused
oriented approach in the criminal justice system. But in India despite some embryonic
developments in this direction, there are number of lacunae in this field and for that
coordinated efforts by all the agencies of criminal justice system is required. After the
coordinated work efforts, transparency and accountability in every segments of criminal
justice system is another important requirement to make the effective implementation of
existing provisions possible, besides laying ground for legislating new victim compensation
programmes.

29 | P a g e
 Bibliography

ß Abner J. Mikva, Victimless Justice, 71 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 189 (1980).

ß Andrew Karman, Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology (2003)
ß Dr.B.M Shukla, Victim Compensation under the Indian Criminal Law, Gujarat Law
Herald, 18(1), 1998,
ß Evan J. Mandery, Amy Shlosberg, Valerie West, and Bennett Callaghan,
Compensation Statutes and Post exoneration Offending, 103 J. Crim. L. &
Criminology 553 (2013).
ß Frances L. Pierson, Victim Compensation through Sentencing.
ß Harvemyc Gregor, Compensation Versus Punishment in Damages Awards; Modern
Law Review, 1965.
ß Marlene A. Young, The Role of Victim Compensation in Rebuilding Victims’ Lives
ß Mishra, S.N., the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (18th ed.) Central Law
Publications
ß Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology (15th ed.) Central Law
Publications
ß Prof. Mehraj UddinMir, Compensatory Jurisprudence and Crime Victim: A
Comparative Analysis, Vitasta law Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, 2014.
ß Rachel Matison, Criminal Victimization, the World Society of Victimology (No.30 of
2009).
ß Robert E. Goodin, Theories of Compensation, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol.
9, 1989
ß https://victimsofcrime.org/help-for-crime-victims/get-help-bulletins-for-crime-
victims/crime-victim-compensation

30 | P a g e