Talat Sanvi vs State Of Jharkhand

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.205 /2023 [@ SLP [CRL]. NO.8501/2022]

TALAT SANVI Appellant(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

Leave granted.

1. The issue raised in this appeal is that whether

interim victim compensation in proceedings for

anticipatory bail can be imposed as a condition for

the same.

2. We do believe that the impugned order suffers

from an infraction of law as the question of interim

victim compensation cannot form part of the bail

jurisprudence.

3. This issue already stands clarified by the

pronouncements of this Court inter alia in Sahab

alam @ Guddu v. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.

-Criminal Appeal No.1318/2022, dated 24.08.2022 and Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Udho Thakur and Anr. ETC. v. The State of Jharkhand Date: 2023.02.04 13:25:34 IST Reason:

& Anr. - Criminal Appeal Nos.1703-1704 of 2022 dated

29.09.2022.

4. In Sahab Alam case (supra) we had dealt with

the orders passed by the learned Judge in various

matters granting bail on condition of depositing

substantive sums of money without consideration of

the requirements of bail dependent on the nature of

offences and thus, it was observed that bail cannot

per se be granted if a person can afford to deposit

the money or has the capacity to pay.

5. All the impugned orders were set aside and the

matter was remitted back.

6. In Udho Thakur (supra) the aspect of use of

expression “victim compensation” was found to be

inappropriate as pre-arrest bail proceedings are not

money recovery proceedings.

7. The matter in this case is one step further as

it is not a payment of money/deposit of money as a

condition of grant of anticipatory bail but the

direction is to pay interim victim compensation in

the proceedings for anticipatory bail.

8. Looking back on the aspect of victim

compensation we may note that in 1960s the

‘victimology’ movement made way for monetary

compensations offered an incentive to governments by

linking such compensation to victims’ cooperation in

the pursuit of criminal prosecutions. Canada and

several states within the United States began

providing victim compensation and thereby encouraged participation in criminal prosecutions. The early

80s witnessed the pioneers of victimology and victim

justice taking predominant initiatives of reforming

the criminal justice system on behalf of the victims

of crime. The UN Declaration on Basic Principles of

Justice for Victims and Abuse of Power was

unanimously adopted by the General Assembly in 1985

(Groenhuijsen, 2014). The Declaration made way for

specific rights and entitlements of victims of

crime, including the right to compensation.

9. Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

provides for order to pay compensation when a court

imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (including

a sentence of death) of which fine forms a part in

the circumstances enumerated therein. Sub-section

(2) imposes a limitation that when fine is imposed

in a case which is subject to appeal no such payment

shall be made before the period allowed for

presenting the appeal has elapsed, or if an appeal

is presented, before the decision of the appeal.

Under sub-section (3) it is by way of compensation

for the person who has suffered any loss or injury

by reason of the act for which the accused person

has been so sentenced. Sub-section (4) also

provides for the appellate court or the High Court

or Court of Sessions to direct payment of

compensation when exercising its power of revisions.

10. We have set forth this to appreciate that

victim compensation is 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 of any imposition pre-finality of the

matter pre-trial.

11. In a recent judgment of this Court in Dharmesh

v. State of Gujarat1 it was opined that it was clear

from the plain reading of Section 357 that such

compensation can only arise after the conclusion of

trial albeit, of course, the same being a matter of

discretion. The High Court’s direction to the

accused for deposit of compensation for the legal

heirs of the deceased (victim), as a condition for

the bail cannot be sustained and, thus, logically

set aside.

12. The Court opined that the objective is clear

that in cases of offences against body, compensation

to the victim should be methodology for redemption.

Similarly, to prevent unnecessary harassment,

compensation has been provided where meaningless

criminal proceedings had been started. Such a

compensation can hardly be determined at the stage

of grant of bail.

13. Not being appreciative of such judicial

misadventure, we have no hesitation in quashing the

1 (2021) 7 SCC 198 condition imposed in the impugned order in this

behalf while maintaining the other aspects of the

grant of anticipatory bail.

14. The appeal is accordingly allowed leaving

parties to bear their own costs.

……………………………………....J. [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL]

……………………………………....J. [ABHAY S. OKA] NEW DELHI;

JANUARY 24, 2023.