TALAT SANVI versus STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. on 24 January 2023

1. The issue raised in this appeal is that whether interim victimcompensation in proceedings for anticipatory bail can be imposed as acondition for the same.

2. We do believe that the impugned order suffers from an infractionEof law as the question of interim victim compensation cannot form partof the bail jurisprudence.

3. This issue already stands clarified by the pronouncements ofthis Court inter alia in Sahab alam @ Guddu v. The State ofJharkhand & Anr. -Criminal Appeal No.1318/2022, dated 24.08.2022Fand Udho Thakur and Anr. ETC. v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.- Criminal Appeal Nos.1703-1704 of 2022 dated 29.09.2022.

4. In Sahab Alam case (supra) we had dealt with the orderspassed by the learned Judge in various matters granting bail on conditionof depositing substantive sums of money without consideration of theGrequirements of bail dependent on the nature of offences and thus, itwas observed that bail cannot per se be granted if a person can affordto deposit the money or has the capacity to pay.

5. All the impugned orders were set aside and the matter wasremitted back.

H

6. In Udho Thakur (supra) the aspect of use of expression “victimcompensation” was found to be inappropriate as pre-arrest bailproceedings are not money recovery proceedings.

7. The matter in this case is one step further as it is not a paymentof money/deposit of money as a condition of grant of anticipatory bailbut the direction is to pay interim victim compensation in the proceedingsfor anticipatory bail.

8. Looking back on the aspect of victim compensation we maynote that in 1960s the ‘victimology’ movement made way for monetarycompensations offered an incentive to governments by linking suchcompensation to victims’ cooperation in the pursuit of criminalprosecutions. Canada and several states within the United States beganproviding victim compensation and thereby encouraged participation incriminal prosecutions. The early 80s witnessed the pioneers of victimologyand victim justice taking predominant initiatives of reforming the criminaljustice system on behalf of the victims of crime. The UN Declaration onBasic Principles of Justice for Victims and Abuse of Power wasunanimously adopted by the General Assembly in 1985 (Groenhuijsen,2014). The Declaration made way for specific rights and entitlements ofvictims of crime, including the right to compensation.

9. Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides fororder to pay compensation when a court imposes a sentence of fine or asentence (including a sentence of death) of which fine forms a part inthe circumstances enumerated therein. Sub-section (2) imposes alimitation that when fine is imposed in a case which is subject to appealno such payment shall be made before the period allowed for presentingthe appeal has elapsed, or if an appeal is presented, before the decisionof the appeal. Under sub-section (3) it is by way of compensation forthe person who has suffered any loss or injury by reason of the act forwhich the accused person has been so sentenced. Sub-section (4) alsoprovides for the appellate court or the High Court or Court of Sessionsto direct payment of compensation when exercising its power of revisions.

10. We have set forth this to appreciate that victim compensationis simultaneous with the final view taken in respect of the alleged offence,i.e., whether it was so committed or not and, thus, there is no question ofany imposition pre-finality of the matter pre-trial.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

A11. In a recent judgment of this Court in Dharmesh v. State ofGujarat[1]it was opined that it was clear from the plain reading of Section357 that such compensation can only arise after the conclusion of trialalbeit, of course, the same being a matter of discretion. The High Court’sdirection to the accused for deposit of compensation for the legal heirsof the deceased (victim), as a condition for the bail cannot be sustainedBand, thus, logically set aside.

12. The Court opined that the objective is clear that in cases ofoffences against body, compensation to the victim should be methodologyfor redemption. Similarly, to prevent unnecessary harassment,compensation has been provided where meaningless criminal proceedingsChad been started. Such a compensation can hardly be determined at thestage of grant of bail.

13. Not being appreciative of such judicial misadventure, we haveno hesitation in quashing the condition imposed in the impugned order inthis behalf while maintaining the other aspects of the grant of anticipatoryDbail.

14. The appeal is accordingly allowed leaving parties to bear theirown costs.

E

Devika Gujral

Appeal allowed.

F

G

H