Source: Delhi High Court 

Why in News? 

A bench of Justice Rekha Palli, Justice Pratibha M Singh, Justice Subramonium Prasad, Justice Saurabh Banerjee and Justice Manoj Jain laid down important points regarding victim compensation scheme.                

• The Delhi High Court held this in the case of Saif Ali @ Sohan v. The State GNCT of Delhi (2025). 

What was the Background of Saif Ali @ Sohan v. State GNCT of Delhi Case?

• The issue in this case pertained to inordinate delay due to following the guidelines laid down in the case of Karan v. State of NCT of Delhi (2021) (which was a 3-judge bench judgment). 
• The current process regarding granting of compensation has caused delays of up to two years in pronouncing sentences due to the mandatory procedure for preparing Victim Impact Reports (VIRs). 
• The above delay has defeated the accused’s right of speedy trial and prevents the timely filing of appeals. 
• It is argued that the guidelines in the case of Karan v. State NCT of Delhi (2021) impose obligations on the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) that are beyond the scope of Section 357 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). 
• Further, it was also argued that asking the accused to make disclosure of his assets would result in violation of his right against self incrimination under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) and would also be against Section 315 and Section 316 of CrPC. 
• Thus, the core issue to be determined here is “ Should the guidelines laid down in Karan v. State of NCT of Delhi (2021) be modified or revoked entirely to address delays and align with statutory provisions, while safeguarding the rights of all stakeholders in the criminal justice system?”

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Court observed that the case of Karan v. GNCT of Delhi (2021) lays down the timelines within which the process of awarding compensation should be completed.  
• However, in reality there has been a lot of delay in following the timelines and the whole process is very time consuming. 
• Thus, there is an inordinate delay in passing of orders of sentence which cannot be passed till the victim compensation scheme under Section 357 CrPC in accordance with the guidelines issued under the case of Karan v. GNCT of Delhi (2021) is determined. 
• In the absence of an order on sentence the judgment cannot be treated as complete and therefore the accused is unable to file an appeal under Section 374 of CrPC. 
• The Court observed that as per Section 357 A of CrPC though the Legal Services Authority step into the process of granting compensation, the Trial Court has the sole prerogative to compute and award victim compensation under cases covered under this section. 
• It was further observed that the directions requiring the DSLSA to conduct a summary inquiry for determination of victim compensation after conviction of the accused would, in our view, amount to clothing the DSLSA with a power which the legislature does not envisage. 
• This delegation would, therefore, be contrary to the very scheme of Section 357, Cr.P.C., which unambiguously vests the Trial Courts with the discretion to determine what would be fair and equitable under the circumstances, for which purpose the Court is required to take into account the peculiar facts of each case. 
• It was further held by the Court that the information regarding the list of his assets and income from the accused cannot be said to be so innocuous so as to not impact the accused at all. 
• The Court therefore laid down the following: 
  • The guidelines set out in Karan v. GNCT of Delhi (2021) would no longer be enforceable. 
  • The Trial Courts should follow a victim centric approach. 
  • the Trial Court may take into account the income and assets of the accused and any other factors as may be deemed appropriate, for which purpose information may be elicited not only from the I.O./prosecuting agency but also from the accused, who will, however, not be asked to make any statement on oath or by way of an affidavit. 
  • However, the Court will not be precluded from taking the assistance of the Legal Services Authority.

What is Victim Compensation Scheme under CrPC and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)? 

• Section 357A of CrPC lays down the victim compensation scheme. 
• This provision is provided for under Section 396 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)  
• The salient features of the scheme are as follows: 
  • Preparation of Scheme: 
    • State Governments, in coordination with the Central Government, must create a scheme to provide funds for compensating victims or their dependents who have suffered due to a crime and require rehabilitation. 
  • Court Recommendations: 
    • When a court recommends compensation, the District Legal Service Authority (DLSA) or State Legal Service Authority (SLSA) will determine the quantum of compensation. 
  • Inadequate Compensation: 
    • If compensation awarded under Section 357 of the CrPC is deemed inadequate or in cases of acquittal/discharge where the victim needs rehabilitation, the trial court may recommend additional compensation. 
  • Unidentified Offender: 
    • If the offender is not identified but the victim is, and no trial occurs, the victim or their dependents can directly apply to the DLSA or SLSA for compensation. 
  • Time-bound Decision: 
    • Upon receiving recommendations or applications, the DLSA/SLSA must complete an enquiry and award adequate compensation within two months. 
  • Immediate Relief: 
    • To alleviate suffering, the DLSA/SLSA may order: 
      • Free first-aid or medical benefits based on a certificate from a police officer (not below the rank of officer-in-charge) or a Magistrate. 
      • Any other interim relief deemed necessary.