Victim – Compensation S-2(1)(y) BNSS

The prevention of victimization is an important part of the overall strategy in the direction and

dissemination of relevant information to the potential victims can be much useful to achieve the objectives in

this regard.

Victim

• As per Section 2(1)(y) BNSS 2023 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.

Order to Pay Compensation

• Section 395 BNSS empowers the Criminal Court to grant compensation to the victim and to order the
payment of costs of the prosecution. It states that -

• (1) When a Court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (including a sentence of 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 the expenses of 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 person or of
having abetted the commission of such an offence, in paying compensation to the persons who are, under the

Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (13 of 1855), entitled to recover damages from the person sentenced for the

loss resulting to them from such death.

• (d) When any person is convicted of any offence which includes theft, criminal misappropriation,
criminal breach of trust, or cheating, or of having dishonestly received or retained, or of having voluntarily

assisted in disposing of, stolen property knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen,

in compensating any bona fide purchaser of such property for the loss of the same if such property is

restored to the possession of the person entitled thereto.

• (2) If the fine is imposed in a case which is subject to appeal no such payment shall be made before the
period allowed for presenting the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal is presented, before the decision of the

appeal.

• (3) 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 reason of the act for which the accused

person has been so sentenced.

• (4) An order under this section may also be made by an Appellate Court or by the High Court or Court
of Session when exercising its powers of revision.

• (5) At the time of awarding compensation in any subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter,
the Court shall take into account any sum paid or recovered as compensation under this section.
 Victim Compensation Scheme

• Section 396 BNSS deals with the victim compensation scheme which provide the State Government to
prepare in co-ordination with the Central Government a scheme for the compensation of the victim or his

dependents.

• This Section states that-

• (1) Every State Government in co-ordination with the Central Government shall prepare a scheme
for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependents who have suffered

loss or injury as a result of the crime and who require rehabilitation.

• (2) Whenever a recommendation is made by the Court 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 scheme referred to in sub-section (1).

• (3) If the trial Court, at the conclusion of the trial, is satisfied, that the compensation awarded under
section 395 is not adequate for such rehabilitation, or where the cases end in acquittal or discharge and the

victim has to be rehabilitated, it may make recommendation for compensation.

• (4) Where the offender is not traced or identified, but the victim is identified, and where no trial takes
place, the victim or his dependents may make an application to the State or the District Legal Services

Authority for award of compensation.

• (5) On receipt of such recommendations or on 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.

• (6) The State or the District Legal Services Authority, as the case may be, to alleviate the suffering of the
victim, may order for immediate first-aid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost on

the certificate of the police officer not below the rank of the officer in charge of the police station or a

Magistrate of the area concerned, or any other interim relief as the appropriate authority deems fit.

Treatment of Victims

• Section 397 BNSS contains provision in relation to the treatment of victims.

• This section has been inserted on the recommendations of the Justice J.S Verma Committee.
• This Section states that all hospitals, public or private, whether run by the Central Government, the
State Government, local bodies or any other person, shall immediately, provide the first-aid or medical

treatment, free of cost, to the rape / sexual assult victims shall immediately inform the police of such

incident.

Case Law

• In Manish Jalan v. State of Karnataka (2008), the Supreme Court held the quantum of compensation
has to be determined by taking into consideration the nature of crime, injury suffered and the capacity of

the convict to pay compensation. The amount of compensation has to be reasonable, which the person

concerned is able to pay

 Public Nuisance (Section 152 – 162 Chapter 11 BNSS 2023)
Term ‘nuisance’ refers to causing unlawful inconvenience in the peace of another person. It
is interference in the life or property of someone else.
• It differs from trespass as trespass is physical interference into another’s life or property.
• ‘Nuisance’ can be inflicted upon a private person’s property such an act falls under private nuisance.
• Public nuisance impacts the public at large.
Concept
• ‘public nuisance’ as the conduct is affecting the public at large or general public.
• ‘Public nuisance’ does not concern the rights of an individual.
• The word ‘public’ includes any class of the public, or any community.
Essentials
• Act/omission of nuisance.
• Causing interference in the peace of others or any advantage.
• Affecting life or property.
• Affecting the public at large.
• Section 268 IPC
• A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes
any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy
property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons
who may have occasion to use any public right. A common nuisance is not excused on the grounds that it causes
some convenience or advantage.
Criminality of Public Nuisance
• Leanse v. Egerton (1945): The Court stated that if the defendant has not done his duty of
taking reasonable care or opting reasonable measures then he shall be liable for creating public nuisance in
case of any mishap taken place with the public.
• K Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala (1999): The Court declared smoking between the public as passive
smoking as such a conduct which declared as an act of creating public nuisance under Section 268 of IPC.
• Soltau v. De Held (1851): The English Court held that the persistent ringing of the bell in the church was
held as an act of public nuisance.
• Sturges v. Bridgman (1879): In this case it was opined by the English Court that public nuisance cannot
be defended with prescriptive rights. Public nuisance can be defended by an act backed by statutory authority.
Punishment
• Section 290 of IPC contains the punishment for the act of causing a public nuisance. The wrongdoer shall
be punished with a fine extendable up to two hundred rupees.
• Section 291 of IPC states the condition where the court has awarded an order of injunction upon the act of
a person breaching public peace, but he is continuing to do so. He shall be liable for imprisonment extendable
up to 6 months or will be liable to fine or both.
Cognizance (S-152 BNSS)
• The Magistrate has been conferred with the power of prohibiting repeated nuisance or continuance of
public nuisance under Section 152 BNSS 2023
• The provision states that ‘A District Magistrate or Sub-divisional Magistrate, or any other Executive
Magistrate empowered by the State Government or the District Magistrate in this behalf, may order any
person not to repeat or continue a public nuisance, as defined in the IPC or any special or local law.’
• The court can also take cognizance in stopping the act of nuisance affecting peace of general public. The
court can award compensation to compensate the breach of public order and decency.
Conclusion
• The act of public nuisance is an offence in rem. The general public gets impacted by such conduct which
invokes a criminal offense. Using explosive substances or cracking fireworks between the public, giving shelter to
a vicious animal, digging holes on road, obstructing public ways, prize fights or practicing the medical profession
without any valid license, polluting the environment, etc., are some examples of acts falling under the ambit of
public nuisance
 The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 introduces significant reforms to India's criminal
justice system, with a particular focus on modernizing the procedures surrounding bail bonds. These changes are
designed to enhance the efficiency, fairness, and accountability of the bail process, ensuring that it aligns with
contemporary legal standards. The new procedures are not only pivotal for the administration of justice but also
crucial for maintaining public trust in the legal system. This article explores the key updates to bail bond
procedures, offering a clear understanding of how these changes impact the process of securing and managing
bail.
Definition of Bond and Bail Bond
BNSS provides clear and precise definitions for the terms "bond" and "bail bond," which are fundamental
to understanding the changes introduced by this legislation.
• Bond: According to Section 2(1)(e), a "bond" refers to a personal bond or an undertaking for release
without surety. This implies that the individual is released on the basis of their personal promise to appear
in court as required, without needing a third party to guarantee their appearance.
• Bail Bond: As per Section 2(1)(d), a "bail bond" involves an undertaking for release with surety. This
means that surety, typically a third party, provides a financial guarantee to ensure the accused's
appearance in court. If the accused fails to appear, the surety may be required to pay the bond amount.
Key Sections
BNSS includes several sections that are particularly relevant to bail bonds, laying out the procedures and
requirements for their execution and enforcement.
Section 485: Bond of Accused and Sureties
Section 485 outlines the conditions under which an accused person can be released on bond or bail bond:
1. Execution of Bond: Before any individual is released, they must execute a bond for a sum determined by
the police officer or court as sufficient. If the individual is released on a bail bond, one or more sureties
must also execute the bond. This bond ensures that the accused will attend court as required and adhere to
any conditions imposed by the court.
2. Conditions of Release: The bond or bail bond must include any conditions imposed by the court for the
release of the accused. This can include requirements such as periodic reporting to the police, restrictions
on travel, or any other conditions deemed necessary by the court.
3. Surety Sufficiency: The court can determine whether the sureties provided are fit and sufficient. This can
be done through affidavits or, if necessary, by conducting an inquiry into the sureties' financial standing
and reliability. This provision ensures that the sureties can fulfill their obligations if the accused fails
to appear in court.
4. Obligation to Appear: The bond or bail bond may also require the accused to appear before higher
courts, such as the High Court or Court of Session, as necessary. This ensures that the accused
remains accountable throughout the judicial process.
Section 487: Discharge from Custody
Section 487 provides the procedure for the discharge of an accused from custody once a bond or bail bond has
been executed:
1. Immediate Release: As soon as the bond or bail bond is executed, the accused must be released from
custody. If the accused is in jail, the court must issue an order of release to the jail officer, who is then
required to release the accused immediately.
2. Exceptions: The section clarifies that this provision does not require the release of any person who is
liable to be detained for other legal matters beyond the scope of the bond or bail bond executed.
Section 490: Deposit Instead of Recognizance
Section 490 introduces an alternative to executing a traditional bond or bail bond by allowing the accused
to deposit a sum of money or Government promissory notes instead:
 • Deposit in Lieu of Bond: If permitted by the court or officer, the accused may deposit a sum of money or
Government promissory notes as an alternative to executing a bond. This deposit serves the same purpose
as a bond, providing a financial guarantee for the accused's appearance in court.
Section 493: Procedure in Case of Insolvency, Death of Surety, or Bond Forfeiture
Section 493 addresses the procedures to be followed if a surety becomes insolvent, dies, or if a bond is forfeited:
1. Replacement of Surety: If a surety becomes insolvent or dies, the court may require the accused to
furnish a new surety. Failure to do so may result in the accused being treated as if they have defaulted on
the original order.
2. Forfeiture of Bond: In cases where a bond is forfeited, the court has the authority to demand fresh
security from the accused. If the accused fails to provide this security, the court may proceed with
enforcement actions as if the original bond had not been complied with.
Legal Implications
• Careful Selection of Sureties: The stricter scrutiny of sureties means that those responsible for securing
bail must ensure that the sureties are reliable and financially capable of fulfilling their obligations.
• Utilizing Deposit Alternatives: The option to use deposits in place of traditional bail bonds offers
flexibility, particularly in cases where finding a suitable surety may be challenging. This alternative can
streamline the bail process and provide a viable option for securing release.
• Active Management of Bail Obligations: With the new regulations, it's essential to closely monitor and
manage bail obligations, particularly in situations where there is a risk of surety insolvency or bond
forfeiture. Proactive management can prevent complications and ensure compliance with court orders.
• Preparedness for Forfeiture Scenarios: Given the detailed procedures for handling bond forfeitures,
those involved in the bail process need to be prepared to address these situations effectively. This includes
having the necessary documentation and evidence ready to respond to any issues that may arise.
Conclusion
The reforms introduced by the BNSS mark a critical evolution in the Indian criminal justice system,
particularly in the realm of bail bonds. By standardizing and strengthening the procedures for securing and
managing bail, BNSS aims to create a more transparent and accountable legal process. These changes protect the
accused's rights and uphold the integrity of the judicial system. As these provisions come into effect, they are set
to play a vital role in shaping the future of criminal justice in India, ensuring that the legal framework
remains robust and responsive to the needs of society
 Security for Keeping Peace & Good Behaviour Section 125-143 BNSS Chapert 9
(prevention is beter than cure)
• Preventive / pohibitary action of executive authorties
• The legal provisions for ensuring “security for keeping the peace and good behavior” are typically found in
Section 107 to 124 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in India.

• Security for Keeping the Peace and Good Behavior:

Security for keeping the peace and good behavior is a legal mechanism used by law enforcement
authorities and courts to prevent individuals from engaging in behavior that may disrupt public order or pose a
threat to the peace and safety of society. It involves requiring individuals to provide a financial guarantee
(security) to ensure their good conduct and prevent them from committing any unlawful acts.
• Relevant Sections in the CrPC:
Section 107 – Security for Keeping the Peace:
• Section 107 of the CrPC empowers the Executive Magistrate to require a person to execute a bond with or
without sureties for keeping the peace. This section is invoked when there is an apprehension that an individual
may commit a breach of the peace.
Section 108 – Security for Good Behavior:
• Section 108 of the CrPC authorizes the Executive Magistrate to demand a person to execute a bond with or
without sureties for maintaining good behavior. This is done when there is a reasonable fear that the individual
may conduct themselves unlawfully or cause a disturbance.
Section 109 – Security by the Accused:
• Section 109 allows the court to require an accused person to execute a bond for their appearance during the
course of an investigation or trial. This may include a bond for keeping the peace or for good behavior.
Section 110 – Security for Persons Discharged:
• Section 110 allows the court to require a person discharged from custody to execute a bond for maintaining
good behavior or for preventing a breach of the peace.

• Procedures
• The procedures under these sections generally involve the concerned magistrate issuing a notice to the
individual, requiring them to appear and show cause as to why they should not be required to provide the specified
security. The individual can then present their case, and the magistrate will decide whether to order the execution
of the bond and, if so, under what conditions.
Duration
• The duration for which the bond remains in force varies and is typically specified by the magistrate. It may
extend for several months or years, and the individual must maintain good behaviour and keep the peace during
that period. Violation of the conditions of the bond may result in forfeiture of the security and further legal action.
• Inder Mohan Goswami vs. State of Uttaranchal (2007) This case emphasized that the power to require an
individual to execute a bond for keeping the peace and maintaining good behavior must be exercised judiciously.
The court should have reasonable grounds to believe that the person’s behavior poses a threat to public order or
safety.
• Nandini Satpathy vs. P.L. Dani (1978) In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of Section 107 of
the CrPC, which allows for the security to keep the peace and for good behavior. The court noted that the
provisions are preventive and not punitive and must be used with caution.
• Romila Thapar vs. Union of India (2018) This case highlighted the importance of free speech and expression
and the need to protect citizens’ right to dissent. It underlined that the power to require an individual to execute a
bond for keeping the peace must be exercised within the bounds of the Constitution.
• Dharampal vs. State of Haryana (2014) In this case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court discussed the
power to demand a bond for good behavior and the principles governing it. The court held that such powers
should be exercised sparingly and not on vague or irrelevant grounds.
• R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta (2009) In this case, the Bombay High Court reiterated that the power to
require a person to furnish security for keeping the peace and maintaining good behavior should not be used
arbitrarily. It should be based on reasonable grounds and should not infringe upon the fundamental rights of the
individual