The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : Assisting crime victims

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Dec 09, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Assisting crime victims

By K.T. Thomas

The plight of those who suffer when a crime is committed deserves more attention.

SOCIAL CONCERN for crime victims is growing. This trend first established itself after human rights became a serious subject nearly five decades ago, and the United Nations General Assembly passed a declaration in November 1985. Indian courts have responded to the problem of succour to victims in measurable terms.

The Supreme Court made a recommendation in 1998 (Gujarat State vs Gujarat High Court) to the Centre that a law be made for setting apart a portion of the wages earned by convicted persons for payment as compensation to deserving victims of the offences committed by the prisoners concerned. The Court also directed that wages be paid to every convict for the work done by him or her at the same rate at which a worker is paid outside the jail under the Minimum Wages Act.

The Fatal Accidents Act of 1855 empowered the dependents of a person killed in an accident to claim damages from the offenders. Though one of the smallest enactments — containing just three provisions — it opened up a wide vista. Even without the Fatal Accidents Act, the common law of England provided for such a remedy to the victims and their dependents. The principle was made applicable in India through the law of Torts.

Some important improvements have come about in recent years for ameliorating the plight of victims of offences. One of them is the legal obligation of the police to furnish a copy of the first information report (FIR) to the complainant free of cost. Of course, in practice, this provision is observed more in the breach.

Another is the victim's right to engage an advocate to assist the prosecution. In addition, the victim can intervene as a party when the accused moves for bail. Finally, he has the right to challenge the order of the trial court before a sessions court by filing a revision petition.

The most significant legal remedy for helping victims of a crime is Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which empowers a court to order compensation for any loss or injury caused by the offence. This amount has to be recovered from the fine, which would be part of the sentence. However, when any fine is imposed as part of the sentence, the court is empowered to order the accused to pay compensation to the person who has suffered any loss or injury because of that offence. The only difficulty is that when the fine amount is not paid by the accused or when the compensation ordered is not paid by the accused, it is an uphill task for the court to recover it from the properties of the accused.

The Madras High Court decided in 1997 (in Arjunan vs State) that the court had to determine the quantum of compensation by taking into consideration the nature of the crime, the manner in which it was committed and the fairness of the amount claimed by the victims, and above all the ability of the accused to pay. The last mentioned could render the provision a mirage because there are a large number of cases in which the offenders are too poor to pay.

There is another set of victims whom the law does not care for, nor does society show any consideration to: the wife and children of those convicted for serious offences and sentenced to life imprisonment. The convict's wife lives like a widow even when her husband is alive, and the children are nearly orphans when their father is alive. Apart from being deprived of a source of livelihood, they are virtually ostracised from society. This is pitiable if one considers that they had not committed any offence. When we speak of victims, it is very unfortunate that these real victims are neither counted nor countenanced.

Lastly, there are those wrongfully implicated in a crime and are punished by lower courts, but are acquitted by superior courts. When I was a judge of the Kerala High Court, I dealt with a case where four police officers were convicted for the murder of a Sub-Inspector and sentenced to life imprisonment. They remained in jail until the High Court passed its verdict in appeal after about five years, when it was found that the Sub-Inspector had not been murdered but had only committed suicide!

The police officers and their kin were the worst victims of an occurrence in which they had been framed. No effort is normally made to wipe the tears of such victims.

Sir Winston Churchill once said that the degree of civilisation of a country is to be measured by the care and attention paid to prisoners languishing in its jails. When he said this, many eyebrows were raised. Now the new perception of victimology that has found favour in many parts of the world should transform the situation so that the level of civilisation and enlightenment is measured with an enlightened mind, different from the narrow tunnel vision that dominated thinking on this until recently.

(The writer is a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India. The article is based on his inaugural address on November 18, 2004, at the Fourth Biennial and first International Conference of the Indian Society of Victimology held at the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli.)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

REFORMING THE UNITED NATIONS

UNHAPPY COHABITATION

Stem cells, cloning, and ethics

Assisting crime victims

Parliament & the people

Kanchi Mutt issue