To ensure that victims of criminal cases are rehabilitated, the supreme court has ruled that they are entitled to monetary compensation, and the court has granted Rs 10 lakh interim compensation to a woman whose husband and son were killed by a gang of kidnappers after the family failed to pay a ransom amount of Rs 50 lakh, 14 years ago.
The apex court said that the compensation would be awarded by courts to the victim or their family members in cases like murder, kidnapping, rape, robbery, dacoity etc which will be in addition to any other monetary compensation that they are entitled to under other laws like insurance, civil suits, etc.
The court has taken a serious view of the matter after the top court was informed that some state governments have failed to frame rules. A compensation scheme was incorporated into section 357A of the CrPc in 2009, under which, if the court feels that the victim deserves compensation, it could direct the state government to pay compensation to rehabilitate the victim.
The court's order came after the additional solicitor general L Nageswara Rao informed the court that out of the 29 states, Andhra Pradesh, Meghalaya and Madhya Pradesh had so far failed to notify the 2009 scheme.
A bench of justices V Gopala Gowda and AK Goel, in a recent judgment, said, "We are of the view that it is the duty of the courts, to take cognizance of the criminal offence, to ascertain whether there is tangible material to show commission of crime, and whether the victim is identifiable and whether the victim of the crime needs immediate financial relief. On being satisfied with an application or on its own motion, the court ought to directly grant interim compensation, subject to final compensation being determined later."
"Such duty continues at every stage of a criminal case where compensation ought to be given and has not been given, irrespective of the application by the victim," the bench also observed.
"At the stage of the final hearing it is obligatory on the part of the court to advertise that the provision and record of finding out whether a case to grant compensation has been made out and, if so, who is entitled to the compensation and how much. The awarding of such a compensation could be interim. The gravity of the offence and the need of the victim are some of the guiding factors to be kept in mind, apart from other such factors as may be found relevant in the facts and circumstances of an individual case," the bench said.
The court has also directed that this judgment must be forwarded to the National Judicial Academy so that all judicial officers in the country can be imparted requisite training to make the provision operative and meaningful.
The court made the ruling while dismissing the appeal filed by an accused, Suresh, Mahesh and Manmohan challenging the life sentence imposed on them by a sessions court in Haryana and upheld by the Punjab and Haryana high court for the killing of two victims—Devender Chopra and his son Abhishek Chopra.
The bench found fault with the high court for refusing the awarding of any monetary compensation to the family despite an application moved by the family, although under Section 357A it is mandatory for the courts to award compensation.
The state government was directed to pay Rs 10 lakh to the wife of deceased Devender Chopra within a month.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}