THE ENTITLEMENT OF VICTIMS FOR COMPENSATION UNDER THE

MAHARASHTRA VICTIMS COMPENSATION SCHEME, 2014

If the individual ought to be always responsible for the

crimes which he commits, he also, ought to be always
indemnified for the crimes of which he is the victim. The
State must indemnify individuals for the damage caused
by crimes which it has not been able to prevent.

Justice requires that a person who has suffered must be

compensated. The emergence of compensatory jurisprudence in light of
the human rights of the victims is a positive philosophy. It underlines the
observance of the doctrine of natural justice in the form of State Liability
in the space of compensatory jurisprudence. The concept of State
compensation has been highlighted in the United Nations Declaration of
Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power,
November, 1985 that when compensation is not fully available from the
offender or other sources, States should endeavor to provide financial
compensation to victims, who have sustained significant bodily injury or
impairment of physical or mental health as a result of serious crimes and
also to the family, particularly dependents of persons who died or become
physically or mentally incapacitated as a result of the victimization.
Rationale of compensation to victimsAs in law of torts, the principle of Ubi jus, ibi remedium which
states that there is no wrong without a remedy, on the same footing,
under the law of Criminal Jurisprudence, the principle that no sufferer of
crime shall go un-redressed has been laid down under provision of
Section 357 and 357A of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, which
makes a provision of compensation to the victims of crime. Compensation
to the victims means something given in recompense, i.e. equivalent
1

rendered. It is to be noted that the whole purpose of compensation is to

make good the loss sustained by the victim or legal representative of the
deceased.
Initially, the criminal justice system in India was focused
on punishment as part of the crime without much attention on the
suffering of victims of crime. The rights of prisoners were protected even
after their conviction, whereas little concern was shown for the rights of
the victims of crime.
Expressing concern for the plight of victims of crime, Honble
Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer commented that the criminal law in India is
not victim oriented and the suffering of victim, often immeasurable is
entirely overlooked in misplaced sympathy for the criminal. Though our
modern criminal law is designed to punish as well as reform the
criminals, yet it overlooked the by-product of crime, i.e. the victim.
In India, the Legislature and the judiciary have taken gradual steps
to develop the necessary principles by which compensation could be paid
to the victims of crimes. The Judiciary through the cases which have been
decided by it propounded a set of principles to provide the remedy of
compensation where the law is not adequate to provide a remedy to the
victim of crime.
Compensatory Provisions in Cr.P.CIn pursuance of the recommendations of Law Commission of India
in its report, a comprehensive provision for compensation to victims of
crime has been inserted in section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (herein after Cr. P.C.). According to S.357 subs.(1) and sub-s.(3), the
court may award compensation to the victim of crime at the time of
passing judgment, if it considers appropriate in a particular case in the
interest of justice. These provisions make the trial courts and the
appellate courts competent to award compensation to the victims of crime
only after trial and conviction of the accused. These powers to award
compensation are not subsidiary to other sentence, but it is in addition
2

there to. It is left to discretion of the court to decide in each case

depending on its facts and circumstances.
Under Section 357 an order of compensation can be passed by
the trial court, appellate court or in revision, at the time of passing
judgment, out of the fine imposed, in four cases,
(a) to the complainant, for meeting expenses properly incurred in the
prosecution;
(b) to any person, who has suffered loss or injury by the
offence, when he can recover compensation in a Civil Court.
(c) to a person entitled to recover damages under the Fatal
Act, when there is a conviction

for

causing

Accidents
death

or

abetment thereof;
(d) to a bonafide purchaser of property, which has become the

subject

of theft, criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, cheating

or receiving or retaining or disposing stolen property, and which is
ordered to be restored to its rightful owner.
Sub-section (3) however, enables the Court to order payment of
compensation

even

in

case

where

substantive

sentence

of

imprisonment only is awarded.

The section must be taken to exclude those expenses in regard to
which

the

court

and process fees.

making an order

has

no

discretion

e.g. payment of Court

The imposition of fine is a condition precedent to

under

Sub-section

(1).

(Pamula Saraswathi v.

State of A.P., AIR 2003 SC 2416).

The compensation can be allowed only out of whole or any part of
the fine recovered. Any person is entitled to compensation for the loss or
injury

caused

by

the

offence,

wife, husband, parent and child

of

and

it

the

deceased

In awarding such compensation, the Court is to take into

3

includes

the
victim.

consideration

various factors such as capacity of the accused to pay, the nature of the
crime,

the nature of the injury suffered and other

relevant factors.

(Sarwan Singh, 1978 Cr LJ 1598 : AIR1978 SC 1525)

It has to be seen that the capacity of the offender plays very
important role while awarding the compensation. In case of Dilip S.
Dahanukar Vs. Kotak Mahindra Co.Ltd. Criminal Appeal No.521/2007,
the Court favoured an inquiry, albeit, summary in nature to determine the
paying capacity of the offender. The Court said: .... The purpose of
imposition of fine and/or grant of compensation to a great extent must be
considered having the relevant factors therefore in mind. It may be
compensating the person in one way or the other. The amount of
compensation sought to be imposed, thus, must be reasonable and not
arbitrary. Before issuing a direction to pay compensation, the capacity of
accused to pay the same must be judged. A fortiori, an enquiry in this
behalf even in a summary way may be necessary. Some reasons, which
may not be very elaborate, may also have to be assigned; the purpose
being that whereas the power to impose fine is limited and direction to
pay compensation can be made for one or the other factors enumerated
out of the same; but sub-s.(3) of s.357 does not impose any such
limitation and thus, power their under should be exercised only in
appropriate cases.
Basically, the accused is responsible for the reparation of any harm
caused to him. However, it might be that the accused, being too poor, is
unable to make any payment or otherwise unable to compensate the
victim. In such situations, the state that has failed to protect the life,
liberty and property of its citizens should compensate the victim for loss
and suffering. Therefore, to compensate the victims of crimes, an
amendment was made in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 whereby a
new provision i.e. Section 357 A has been added which provides for the
Victim Compensation Scheme.

Section 357A. Victim Compensation Scheme(1) Every State Government in coordination 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 requires

rehabilitation.
(2)Whenever

recommendation

is

made

by

the

Court

for

compensation, the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal

Services Authority, as the case may be, shall decide the quantum of
compensation to be awarded under the scheme.
(3) If the trial Court, at the conclusion of trial, is satisfied, that
compensation awarded under Section 357 is not adequate of the
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 not trial takes place, the victim or his dependents
may make an application to the State or District Legal Services
Authority for award of compensation.
(5) On receipt of such recommendation or on the application

under

sub-section (4), the State or District Legal Services Authority shall,

after due enquiry, award adequate compensation by completing the
enquiry within two months.
(6) The State or 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 officer in charge of police station or Magistrate of the
area.

While subsection (1) is an enabling provision, subsections (2) to (6)

prescribe the modalities for giving effect to the victim compensation
scheme.
This was the much-needed relief to the victims of offences and
therefore one of the most progressive legislation in recent times. Thus it
states that 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.

Referring to Section 357A of Cr.P.C., the Supreme Court observed

that it requires every State Government, in co-ordination with the
Central Government to prepare a Scheme for providing funds or for the
purpose of payment of compensation to the victims who require
rehabilitation.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court concluded that since the Relief

Fund is expected to be utilized for various purposes, it may not be proper
or advisable to grant huge amounts in one or two cases, thereby denying
the benefits of the fund to other needy persons who are also the victims of
catastrophe. Therefore it was expected that such compensation awarded
to the victims should be reasonable considering their suffering, injury or
the loss caused.
In exercise of powers conferred by section 357A of Cr.P.C.
the Government of Maharashtra in co-ordination with the Central
Government has framed the scheme for the purpose of compensation to
the victims or their dependents, who have suffered loss or injury as result
of a crime and who required rehabilitation which is called as
the 'Maharashtra Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014'.

Eligibility

and

Victim

Compensation

Disbursement

under

Maharashtra Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014-

(1)

Procedure for Disbursement of CompensationFor disbursement of compensation to the victim, there shall be a
fund called The Victim Compensation Fund from which the amount of
compensation, as decided by the District Legal Services Authority has to
be paid to the victim or to her dependents.
The procedure for granting compensation is provided in Section 5
of the aforesaid scheme. Whenever the court makes recommendation for
compensation, the District Legal Services Authority, examines the case,
verify the contents of the claim with regard to the loss or injury or
rehabilitation as a result of crime and may also called for any other
relevant information necessary for consideration of the claim.
The quantum of compensation has to be decided by District Legal
Services Authority on the basis of loss or injury or requirement for
rehabilitation, medical expenses to be incurred on treatment and such
incidental charges, such as funeral expenses etc.
The compensation may vary from case to case depending upon
facts of each case. Where the victim has received compensation from the
government, insurance company or any other institution in relation to the
crime in question, such payment shall be considered as a part of
compensation under the scheme and if the eligible compensation amount
exceeds the payment received by the victim from collateral sources, the
balance amount shall be paid.
This scheme also provides for the provision of immediate first aid
and medical benefit or any other interim relief to alleviate sufferings of
victim on a certificate of a police officer not below the rank of officer incharge of police station or a Magistrate of the area concerned.

The copy of order of compensation shall be placed on record of the

trial court to enable the court to pass an order of compensation u/s.
357(3) Cr.P.C.
Recovery of compensation awarded to victim from wrongdoer/
accused
The District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services
Authority may in proper cases, institute proceedings before competent
court for recovery of the compensation granted to victim from the person
responsible for causing loss or injury as a result of crime committed by
him.
LimitationIt is provided under the scheme that the application u/s.357(4)
Cr.P.C. for compensation shall be made within 60 days from the date of
crime.
AppealThe provision of appeal is also provided under the scheme. It states
that any victim aggrieved by the denial of compensation may file appeal
before the State Legal Services Authority within the period of 90 days.
The schedule of compensation is provided under the scheme,
which prescribes the limit of compensation to be awarded in each cases.
Particulars of Loss or Injury

Maximum limit of Compensation

Loss of life

Rs.2,00,000/-

Permanent disability

Rs. 50,ooo/-

Acid Attack

Rs.3,00,000/-

The Scheme prescribes that the quantum of compensation to be awarded

shall not exceed the amount mentioned in the schedule.
8

The basic idea behind grant of providing compensation to victims

is to give support to restitute them in the position they were having before
the incidence of crime. No doubt, the suffering or loss which the victim
has suffered may not be totally compensated in terms of money, however,
by proving financial aid, at least financial burden before the family of
victim could be lessened upto certain extent.
Thus, it can be observed that the victim compensation is an
important aspect of victim restitution in criminal justice system. The
Supreme Court in the case of Ankur Shivaji Gaikwad Vs. State of
Maharashtra (2013) 6 SCC, has observed that a long line of judicial
pronouncements of Supreme Court of India recognized a paradigm shift
in the approach to victims of crime who are held entitled to reparation,
restitution or compensation for loss or injury suffered by them. It is
reiterated by the Court its view and further impressed that now the courts
have to give reasons for not compensating the victim while deciding the
case.
Section 357-A empowers the Court to direct the State to pay
compensation to the victim in such cases where the compensation
awarded under Section 357 is not adequate for such rehabilitation, or
where the case ends in acquittal or discharge and the victim has to be
rehabilitated. It is also beyond dispute that the occasion to consider the
question of award of compensation would logically arise only after the
court records a conviction of the accused. Capacity of the accused to pay
which constitutes an important aspect of any order under Section 357
Code of Criminal Procedure would involve a certain enquiry albeit
summary unless of course the facts as emerging in the course of the trial
are so clear that the court considers it unnecessary to do so. Such an
enquiry can precede an order on sentence to enable the court to take a
view, both on the question of sentence and compensation that it may in
its wisdom decide to award to the victim or his/her family.

To sum up, it can be said that it is the responsibility of State to

rehabilitate

the

victim

by

providing

assistance

and

adequate

compensation for the loss suffered. The criminal justice system is

sensitive towards the needs of victims of crime. Moreover, judicial
activism in India has also opened the ways to Victimology in Indian
criminal justice system. The concern of the courts for crime-victims is the
result of sensitive justice system for the losses suffered by them as a result
of the crime. The scheme introduced by the Maharashtra State to
rehabilitate the victims of crime is in consonance with the directions
given under code of criminal procedure, but, the real justice would be said
to be given to these provisions of the statute, when courts will actually
implement these provisions while deciding the genuine cases before it, for
compensating and rehabilitation of real victims of the crime.

Hence, respectfully submitted.

10