Victim Compensation in the Indian Realm
Sambhav Chhabra
Sophomore at National Law University- Shimla || Founder Bench Notes || Co-Founder- Mantra
Introduction
After the onset of a criminal proceeding, it is such a criminal whose name echoes throughout every nation’s newspapers, but under such bustle, we forget about the person who was wronged- the victim. “Victims should be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity. They are entitled to access to the mechanisms of justice and to prompt redress, as provided for by national legislation, for the harm that they have suffered”- An article straight out of the United Nation’s declaration for victims to which India tries to conform to. The relevance of justice to victims could be sourced straight out of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights
Who is a victim?
To dispense justice to victims, the first step would be identifying one. In the Indian realm, pinpointing victims has been done in several statutes, all of them holding a similar gist. The novel Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita labels a victim as "...a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission of the accused person and includes the guardian or legal heir of such victim”. Adding to such fundamental definition, the Uttarakhand police Act avers “...criminal harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights...”
The two premier laws, in addition to the UN declaration, give a rough view of who to include when we talk about a victim, which, in layman’s words, is nothing but ‘the person, or his family, who has suffered mental, monetary or physical agony. Once the definition is set, we could move on to the laws bolstering the victim's stand.
Laws in Support
Victim’s rights place themselves in Indian laws primarily in one statute section 357A of the CrPc (repealed) or now section 396, 397 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. With a similar gist, the above section lays that the state bears the onus to compensate ‘victims’ and provide rehabilitation or additional assistance. The District State Legal Service Authority, along with the State Legal Service Authority, helps define the quantum of compensation to be provided coupled with free medical aid in situations. The laws not only provide the victim with monetary relief in the form of compensation but also provide medical help to the victims.
The citizens witness 5 possible legislations under which compensation may be awarded:
?Victim compensation draws support from the constitution itself, article 51 A, which lays down the duty of the state to secure "the right to public assistance in
cases of disablement and in other cases of undeserved want" & "to have compensation for
living creatures and to develop humanism" respectively. Though not in concrete words, the constitution impliedly gives the victim a soft-landing spot as article 21, which empowers people with the right to life and the right to get compensation, can also be interpreted as an integral part.
Working
2015 witnessed the establishment of the Central Victim Compensation fund, the origin story of which is a controversial one. In 2009, the central government mandated every state to develop a scheme that conforms to the centre's scheme for compensating victims. The scheme's primary objective is to furnish financial assistance to victims or their dependents who have incurred loss or injury as a result of a crime and require rehabilitation. In furtherance of the above, every state gave birth to their very own victim compensation scheme.
A Ministerial initiative was in the form of ‘One Stop Centres’ or the OSC by the Ministry of Women and Child Development to be piloted by centres in each state. The primary objective of such OSC is to provide an?integrated range of services, including medical, legal, and
psychological support under one roof for women and girls who face violence.
Upon the trial's conclusion, the Appellate Court has the power to increase the compensation granted to the victim of a crime if the lower court's compensation is deemed insufficient. If the accused person cannot be located, it is the responsibility of the state to provide compensation to the victim of the crime as directed by the court. If a fine is not part of the punishment given by the court, the guilty person may be required to pay the victim for any harm or damage caused by the crime. The court will specify the exact amount of compensation at the time of the sentencing. The central jails follow a system where the inmates perform various skilled or unskilled labour in exchange for remuneration ranging from ?20-225 per day; in case of heinous offences,?half of such remuneration is given to the victim. While things look good on paper, things are nothing but turbulent.
Distance from what is needed
India is known as a country to have sound legislation but no execution vouching for it. Like other schemes, victim compensation has been yet another target of such lousy execution. There is no systematic method for categorization of the victim based on the nature of the crime or the age of the victim. Some states took the age of the victim into account, while others did not. Under the CVCF, Uttar Pradesh received the highest amount of Rs 28.1 crore, followed by Madhya Pradesh with Rs 21.8 crore. Only Odisha, Rajasthan, West Bengal, and Maharashtra received over Rs 10 crore. However, the allocation of funds among the different states does not seem to follow any consistent logic. For instance, if the population or female population were the criteria, Madhya Pradesh would have ranked sixth, yet it received the most funds after Uttar Pradesh. Additionally, Nagaland, with a population over 30 times larger than Lakshadweep, received the same amount of funds, only Rs 10 lakh. Even though its population is five times larger, Nagaland received less funds than Andaman & Nicobar Islands. Furthermore, even if crimes against women were the criteria, Delhi and Assam had the highest number of crimes per one lakh population between 2014 and 2016. Thus, it appears that there was no clear rationale behind the distribution of funds under CVCF.
?The scheme appears to be suffering from a lack of publicity, which is demonstrated by the low number of victims who have taken advantage of it. Specifically, in Telangana, only nine victims were able to receive compensation under this scheme between 2016-17 and 2017-18 (up until November 2017). It is worth noting that most of these nine victims were from a single district.
?
领英推荐
International Position
In 1963, New Zealand enacted a pro-grant under which the state would compensate
victims of violent crimes. Shortly thereafter, Great Britain initiated a similar plan.
Since that time, three states in the United States have produced such plans: California in
1966, New York in 1966 and Massachusetts in 1967. The plans are attempts to create
solutions to a problem most worthy of attention.?
In the 20th century, particularly after the UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crimes & Abuse of Power, 1985, the victim's perspective emerged in a new and powerful way. In 2006, the UN adopted guidelines to define the rights of victims of gross violations of international human rights law. This was a pioneering event where victims and their rights were defined at an international level. The guidelines aimed to provide fair treatment, compensation and justice to the victims. It is considered the Magna Carta of the rights of victims.
The United States of America has its own version of the CVCF, developed in 1984, the Victims of Crimes Act. Millions are deposited every year by Criminal fines, penalty fees forfeited bail bonds etc. The act takes into cognisance ‘mental harm’ & ‘emotional injury’. The amended act of 1992 does not compensate for pain and suffering since they do not consider the state to be a tortfeasor and, therefore, not liable to compensate. However, in Tennessee, such compensation is payable only to victims of rape and crimes involving sexual deviancy, "taking into account the particular circumstances” involved in such crime.
While the United Kingdom is a signatory to the European Convention on Compensation of Victims of violent crime, 1983 ensures the apt application of UN provisions. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Act of 1995 was introduced by Parliament and came into effect in 1996. In 2008, the UK implemented the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, which allowed people to apply for compensation or report any injuries they may have suffered. A non-statutory program was established in 1964, which received yearly funding from the British Parliament. The Criminal Inquiries Compensation Act of 1955 gave this program legal legitimacy.
Overall, the internal position of the concept is solid and has continuously been bolstered by not only the UN’s but also the nation’s efforts.
Conclusion
A person who becomes a victim battles a number of symptoms, starting with an adrenaline rush, being frozen, increased blood pressure, etc. [Physical repercussions] ensuing such symptoms are the psychological distress on the memory of such an incident. Physical injuries may be a permanent effect of crime, and there is evidence that this has a negative effect on long-term psychological recovery since the physical scars serve as a of the crime [psychological repercussions].?
?Although less documented, financial repercussions cannot be put on the back burner. The victim, in several ways, faces such losses, including medical care, repair or replacement of property destroyed, funeral expenses etc. To help the victim from crushing under the burden, it is the nation's need to place Victimology at the central stage and keep efforts driven towards helping the victims avoid the repercussions mentioned above and, if faced, try to alleviate the burden. India has treaded on the right path; it still faces several challenges looming large in future, but with challenges, the nation strengthens.
REFERENCES
1. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for victims of Crimes and Abuse of Power,1985, Ar. 4.
2. Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Sec 2, cl. (y).
3. Uttrakhand Police Act, 2007, Sec 2, Cl (zb).
4. INDIA CONST, 1950, Ar. 51, cl. (A).
5. INDIA CONST, 1950, Ar. 21.
7. Glenn E. Floyd, Victim Compensation Plans, 55 A.B.A.J. 159 (1969).
8. Victims of Crime Act, 1984.
9. European Convention of Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes, 1983.
10. Criminal Injuries Compensation Act, 1995.
11. Centre for International Crime Prevention, Handbook on Justice for victims, 4, 1999.
?
Attended Department of Law, University of Calcutta
4 个月Thought Provoking!
Law Student at NLU Shimla
4 个月Good work Sambhav!