Victim Compensation: Stakeholder Dynamics and Implementation

Challenges-A Critical Analysis

RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED FOR ADMISSION INTO Ph.D.

PROGRAM-2024

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

Mr. M. Suneel Kumar

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH

 Introduction

Victim compensation became vital part to the criminal justice system. It aims to compensate crime
victims for their losses and suffering. However, victim compensation emphasizes victims' rights,
rehabilitation, and dignity, unlike the classical approach to criminal justice, which focuses on the
offender and its punitive aspect. This concept has gained popularity in India through legislation,
judicial interpretations, and constitutional duties. Compensation guarantees justice, punishes
perpetrators, and heals victims. Victims receive financial and psychological support. the significance of
victim compensation in achieving restorative justice, the history of victim rights in India, the
constitutional underpinnings under Articles 14 and 21, and an overview of victim compensation.
notion of victim compensation Victims of crime can receive monetary and non-monetary
compensation. Assault, sexual violence, acid assaults, domestic violence, and property crime can
cause bodily, psychological, and financial harm. Through restitution that aids recovery and
rehabilitation, compensation seeks to restore harm. Unlike criminal fines or civil litigation damages,
victim compensation is unique. It is based on the idea that the state, as the protector of its citizens, must
care for victims of criminal action that breaches the social agreement. When offenders cannot be found
or have been acquitted and cannot provide financial support, victim compensation systems provide
state-funded assistance. Many legislative frameworks control victim compensation in India. These
frameworks include the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Indian Penal Code (IPC),
currently BNS, BNSS, and BSA, and sector-specific laws like the 2015 SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Amendment Act. Despite these legislative foundations, compensation schemes are
inconsistently administered, and awareness, access, and financing are lacking. Victim rights and
compensation have grown in India.

Evolution of victim compensation in the Indian legal framework

The recognition of victim rights and compensation in India is a phenomenon that emerged very
recently. Over the course of several decades, the criminal justice system placed a heavy emphasis on
the prosecution and punishment of criminals, quite often ignoring the misery of victims.
1. The Early Years of Independence and the Colonial Era: Under British rule, India's legal system was
heavily dominated by the British legal tradition, focusing more on retributive punishment than
treatment. While the case of a crime was being investigated, victims were mainly considered as
witnesses, and the suffering they endured or the ability of the victims to recover had little importance in
the trial. After gaining independence for the country, this approach of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, which was later amended in 1973, remained as is; there was not
much chance for compensation to victims.
2. The right to life and personal liberty has been preserved by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Article 21 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has construed under very broad terms in addition to
the right to live with dignity and also the right to find remedies for abuses of personal liberty.
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) is an example of a case where the Supreme Court of India
emphasized that it is the state's duty to protect and restore the dignity of persons.
This establishment of victim compensation is according to Article 21 since it recognizes that crimes
violate the rights of victims to life and dignity and, consequently, require the participation of the state.
Considerations About the Role of Victim Compensation in Restorative Justice Restorative justice
places an emphasis on mending the harm that was caused by criminal activities, as opposed to merely
punishing the person who committed the crime. In this paradigm, victim compensation plays a pivotal
role because it focuses on the following: Rehabilitation and healing. Compensation assists victims in
healing from the physical, mental, and financial injuries that result in their reintegration into society.
This is through providing financial support. 2. Recognition of injury: The state or the perpetrator
recognizes the injury inflicted through compensation, which is an affirmation of the victim's status and
dignity.
3. Community and Social Responsibility Restorative justice transcends the victim-offender dimension
and assumes the involvement of the community as well as that of the state, which eventually builds a
common commitment to justice. In addition, victim compensation also plays an integrating role in civil
and criminal judicial systems. Victims under traditional systems often find redress through civil
lawsuits.
This is a lengthy, costly, and sometimes inaccessible process for many people.
To avoid this situation where victims are left to bear the burden of their suffering alone, compensation
systems offer an option that is faster and more just.

Judicial Activism and Legislative Reforms:

The 1980s and 1990s marked a shift towards greater recognition of victim rights. The Supreme Court
and High Courts, through landmark judgments, emphasized the need for victim-centric justice. In Delhi
Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court highlighted the
importance of compensating rape survivors and directed the government to establish compensation
schemes. The introduction of Section 357A of the CrPC in 2008 now section 396 in BNSS was a
watershed moment, which obliged state governments to provide victim compensation schemes. This
provision was the first systematic attempt to institutionalize it as a state obligation.

Contemporary Developments:

The judgments of the Supreme Court in Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) and Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad
v. State of Maharashtra (2013) have further opened up the possibilities of victim compensation, holding
the judiciary responsible for delivering reparations even when the offenders are acquitted or traceless.
Today, every state in India has a victim compensation scheme in place under the Section 357A
umbrella, though implementation remains uneven.
Two Section 357 and Section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code
The function of Section 357 is that the court shall have powers to order compensation paid by way of
fine so awarded, payable to victims in respect of their suffering, following upon confirmation of his
guilt of the offender.

Important features

It imposes a duty on every state government to formulate a victim compensation scheme in

collaboration with the Central Government. This provision empowers the courts to grant interim
compensation to the victims or their dependents, especially where the accused cannot be found or
cannot pay.
Determining and disbursing compensation may be assigned either to the District Legal Services
Authority or the State Legal Services Authority. The effect of Section 357A is that reliance on the
perpetrator's conviction is reduced, as a result of which compensation becomes available to a larger
number of victims. Still, the important problems include the fact that the amounts of compensation are
within discretion and that there are delays in the procedure.
IPC Sections That Are Relevant Within the Indian Penal Code, there are various clauses that are either
directly or indirectly related to compensation for victims. Some of these include:
clause 326A: This is a clause introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 2013, which
provides for compensation to acid attack victims, including medical treatment and rehabilitation costs.
It is the duty of Section 376D to provide compensation, rehabilitation, and ample monetary support to
the victims of gang rape. Although these laws are progressive, they are concerned about certain crimes
only. As a result, many victims of other offenses are not given equal legislative protections.
More Relevant Laws

Section 21(2)(iii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, requires that relief
and rehabilitation measures be given to victims of caste-based atrocities, including monetary
compensation. The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, is a landmark legislation aimed at
preventing and addressing crimes and atrocities committed against individuals belonging to Scheduled
Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in India. This Act provides a legal framework to safeguard the
rights of these vulnerable communities, offering mechanisms for relief, rehabilitation, and
compensation for victims of caste-based violence and discrimination.
The Act not only criminalizes acts of violence and discrimination but also mandates compensation
and relief for victims, ensuring that they receive adequate support for the suffering they endure due to
such offenses. One of the most significant aspects of this law is its provision for monetary
compensation as part of the victim's rehabilitation process. This compensation is intended to provide
immediate relief to victims and help them recover from the trauma caused by atrocities.
Key Provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015:
1. Section 15A(11)(b). This section mandates the state to compensate the victims and their
dependents immediately with immediate relief in cash or kind. This further compels the rights
of the victims to be monetarily compensated for the caste-based violence and atrocities faced by
them.

Framework of Compensation
Both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have enacted rules under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act to ensure that victims of caste-based atrocities are provided with timely and adequate
compensation. The state governments have established state-specific guidelines that define the
compensation process, the quantum of compensation, and the procedures for application and
disbursement.

Quantum of Compensation:
The compensation provided under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act varies depending on the
nature and severity of the crime. The compensation framework for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
includes the following categories:
 1. Murder or Permanent Disability: Victims who suffer from murder or permanent disability
due to caste-based violence are eligible for compensation in the range of ₹8-10 lakhs. The
exact amount depends on the specific rules followed by the respective state.
2. Sexual Assault or Grievous Injury: Victims of sexual assault or other grievous injuries caused
by caste-based atrocities can receive compensation ranging from ₹5-8 lakhs. Again, this
amount varies depending on the state’s specific guidelines and the severity of the injury.
3. Property Damage: Victims who suffer property damage due to caste-based violence can
receive compensation, the amount of which is determined based on the estimated loss incurred.
Role of the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and State Legal Services Authority (SLSA):
In both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, the DLSA or SLSA plays a vital role in the victim
compensation process. These bodies are responsible for assessing the eligibility of victims, calculating
the compensation amount, and ensuring timely disbursement. They act as intermediaries between the
victims and the government, working to make sure that compensation is provided without undue delay.
The DLSA or SLSA may also coordinate with local authorities, police, and legal aid organizations to
facilitate the victim’s access to compensation, particularly in rural or marginalized areas where
awareness of the compensation scheme may be limited.

The Research Question, Scope, and Gap

The central question in this research is: Is the victim compensation system in India effective in meeting
the aims of addressing victim harm, rehabilitation, and restoring dignity? This question springs from
the apparent lacunas between the legal provisions and their implementation. Even in the face of
legislative interventions such as Section 357A of the CrPC, The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act, 2015, and Section 21(2)(iii) of the 1989 Act, many victims are still not compensated
because of the delay in procedures, lack of standardization, and lack of funds. Social stigma and low
awareness also create a gap between the victims and the justice system. This study will critically
analyse whether the existing system is serving its purpose or is failing to provide equal justice to the
victims. The research method followed is doctrinal legal research. The scope of the research is limited
to the states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, as well as the special acts of The SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, and judgments from the past 15 years as precedence.
Objectives of the Study

1. Legal Framework Analysis: Look at statutory provisions like Sections 357 and 357A of the CrPC
and associated laws to determine strengths and weaknesses.
2. Implementation Review: Review the success of state compensation schemes in delivering speedy
and adequate redress to victims.
3. Gap-Filling: Identify procedural, financial, and structural gaps that mar the effectiveness of the
system.
4. Reform Suggestions: Develop proposals for standardization, better funding, and overall support
mechanisms.

Hypothesis

1. India’s victim compensation system is insufficiently implemented, leading to gaps in meeting

victims’ needs.
2. Standardizing compensation amounts, ensuring adequate funding, and integrating rehabilitation
services can significantly enhance the system’s effectiveness.

Literature Review

"A Critical Study on Victim Compensation Under Various Laws of India" Legal Service India
This article details victim compensation rules in India and highlights legal growth. State governments
must develop victim compensation systems under Section 357A of the 2008 CrPC amendment. The
paper discusses improper implementation, over-reliance on offender conviction, and state-specific
compensation levels. It also addresses the judiciary's jurisprudence to ensure victims' rights are equal to
criminals', including the court's obligation to consider compensation in every criminal case. The paper
heavily draws on the Malimath Committee's victim-friendly justice system recommendations.

An Analysis of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (JETIR)

This research paper examines the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and its legal provisions
to protect SCs and STs from caste-based violence and prejudice. Section 3 of the Act criminalizes
physical aggression, social ostracism, property rights denial, and economic exploitation. It also requires
Special Courts to accelerate caste-based offense trials. These courts attempt to speed victim justice and
deter criminals. The article highlights the Act's solid legal framework that addresses SC/ST
populations' complex issues. Importantly, Special Courts prioritize caste-based violence cases and
guarantee justice is neither delayed nor denied. The Act gives victims legal recourse and upholds their
dignity and rights by criminalizing a wide range of offenses. Despite its strong framework, the SC/ST
Act is difficult to apply. The Act is restricted by procedural delays, especially in FIR registration and
inquiry. Insufficient infrastructure, such as grassroots staff, hinders the Act's enforcement. These issues
delay justice for victims, weakening their trust in the legal system. The research indicates that the
SC/ST Act empowers marginalised populations and provides legal protections, but implementation
inadequacies impede its efficacy. Due to resource shortages and procedural inefficiencies, better
resource allocation and monitoring are needed. The research stresses that addressing these difficulties is
essential to achieving the Act's goals. Infrastructure, training, and awareness campaigns can help law
enforcement implement the legislation. The study recommends targeted policy initiatives to improve
Act implementation. This involves increasing Special Court funding, simplifying FIR registration, and
training district and block staff. Enhanced monitoring and accountability are needed to guarantee
victims obtain prompt justice.

Draconian Legislation of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Law Brigade Publishers India
The paper critically examines the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, especially its revisions.
The Act addressed systemic caste-based discrimination and atrocities, but the study shows its dual
impact: protecting marginalized communities and debates about its potential misuse. The paper
analyses the Act's tougher modifications, such as abolishing anticipatory bail and closing preliminary
inquiries for bringing complaints. The study highlights the SC/ST Act's effectiveness in fighting caste-
based violence in rural areas, where caste persecution is most severe. Case studies show how the Act
has allowed victims to seek justice and hold criminals accountable, boosting marginalized
communities' social status. The report contends that the Act is necessary to alleviate structural
inequalities and safeguard vulnerable groups. The paper also raises Act implementation problems.
Money-related FIR registration incentives have been accused of misuse. Automatic arrests without a
preliminary inquiry and other procedural rigidities of the Act are also criticized for violating the
accused rights. The study shows how these provisions might lead to false charges and personal
vendettas.
The paper balances victim justice and accused rights. While accepting the need for strict measures to
eliminate caste-based atrocities, it urges legislative reform to prevent abuse. The authors recommend
procedural precautions such as independent verification before arrests and FIR registration
accountability. The report also criticizes the socio-political milieu, claiming that legislative rigidity can
instil fear in public, especially in caste-free areas. However, the authors stress that improvements must
not weaken the Act's protections for SC/ST populations.
The article recommends a balanced strategy that includes Increasing institutional checks and balances
to reduce misuse. Implementing impartial preliminary investigations without delaying justice for
genuine victims. Educating law enforcement and judges on the Act's goals to ensure equitable
application.

Conclusion

The study of victim compensation in India reveals a dynamic interplay between legislative intent,
judicial interventions, and practical implementation challenges. The evolution of victim-centric justice,
as enshrined in constitutional principles under Articles 14 and 21, signifies a paradigm shift towards
recognizing victims not only as witnesses but as stakeholders in the justice process. The SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, alongside provisions like Sections 357 and 357A of
the CrPC, has established a robust framework for addressing the harm caused by crimes. These laws
aim to rehabilitate victims through financial compensation, social restoration, and acknowledgment of
their suffering. Despite the progress made, significant challenges persist. Procedural delays, lack of
uniformity across states, and low public awareness have hampered the effective delivery of justice. The
socio-political dimensions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 further
underline the need for a balanced approach—ensuring stringent protections for vulnerable communities
while preventing misuse. The gaps in the implementation of victim compensation schemes call for
targeted reforms, including better resource allocation, streamlining application processes, and
integrating victim support services such as counseling and medical aid. The overarching principle of
restorative justice requires not only punitive measures but also the rehabilitation and dignity of victims.
Bridging legislative intent and real-world outcomes demands a multi-pronged approach involving legal,
administrative, and societal reforms. This synthesis of efforts can pave the way for a victim-centric
justice system that is inclusive, equitable, and responsive to the needs of all individuals, irrespective of
socio-economic or caste disparities. Through this research, the need for a standardized and
comprehensive approach to victim compensation becomes evident, one that aligns with global norms
and the constitutional ethos of equality and dignity. By addressing the systemic gaps and fostering a
more victim-oriented legal framework, India can ensure justice is both delivered and restorative in
nature.