Victim compensation: the role of the courts and of the NHRC
Penology and Victimology · Unit V · Topic 17 of 17 · 6 min read
On this page
Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.
Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.
1. Public law compensation
- Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, 1983 INSC 85, (1983) 4 SCC 141: detained for over fourteen years after acquittal; the Court awarded compensation in a habeas corpus petition, saying that release alone would make Article 21 an empty promise.
- Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, 1993 INSC 113, (1993) 2 SCC 746: death in police custody; liability for violation of fundamental rights is strict, and sovereign immunity is no defence to the public law remedy.
- D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1996 INSC 1508, (1997) 1 SCC 416: custodial violence; monetary compensation is an appropriate and effective remedy for the infringement of Article 21, in addition to any private law claim.
- Chairman, Railway Board v. Chandrima Das, 2000 INSC 38, (2000) 2 SCC 465: a Bangladeshi woman gang-raped by railway employees in a railway building. The Railways were held liable to compensate; the right to life under Article 21 extends to non-citizens, and the Court referred to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- State of Andhra Pradesh v. Challa Ramkrishna Reddy, 2000 INSC 257: a prisoner killed in jail through the negligence of the authorities; State liable.
2. Compensation for victims of sexual violence
- Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v. Union of India, 1994 INSC 467, (1995) 1 SCC 14: directed a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, and compensation by the court on conviction and by the Board even without conviction.
- Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, 1995 INSC 907, (1996) 1 SCC 490: interim compensation during the pendency of a rape trial.
- Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, 2018 INSC 1192, (2019) 2 SCC 703: the Court directed that the NALSA Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/other Crimes, 2018 be adopted and applied by all States and Union Territories as a guideline, so that compensation for women victims would be uniform.
3. Compensation by the criminal court
- Hari Kishan v. Sukhbir Singh, 1988 INSC 239, (1988) 4 SCC 551: section 357 is a measure of responding appropriately to crime and of reconciling the victim with the offender; courts should exercise it liberally, fixing an amount that is reasonable and within the offender's means, with time or instalments for payment.
- Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, 2013 INSC 309, (2013) 6 SCC 770: the power is coupled with a duty; the court must apply its mind to compensation in every case and record reasons for awarding or refusing it.
- Suresh v. State of Haryana, 2014 INSC 819, (2015) 2 SCC 227: courts must consider interim compensation under section 357A at the earliest stage, and the compensation fixed in State schemes should be reasonable.
4. State compensation programmes
Section 396 BNSS (old 357A) requires every State Government, in coordination with the Central Government, to prepare a scheme providing funds for compensation to victims or dependants who need rehabilitation. The District or State Legal Services Authority decides the quantum on the court's recommendation or the victim's application. Compensation is available even where the offender is not traced or identified, or where the trial ends in acquittal or discharge, and the authority may order immediate first aid or medical benefits. Karnataka's scheme, the Karnataka Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011, was framed under section 357A and notified in 2012; the amounts were revised in 2015, and the NALSA scheme of 2018 applies to women victims.
Administration of these programmes is uneven in practice: low awareness among victims, delay in disbursal, small amounts compared to need, and poor coordination between courts, police and legal services authorities. Courts have repeatedly directed better publicity and time-bound payment.
5. The role of the NHRC
The National Human Rights Commission is constituted under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Its composition, powers and procedure are covered in the Human Rights notes on the Act and on the NHRC. For victims the relevant provisions are:
- Section 12, functions: inquire, suo motu or on a petition by a victim or any person on his behalf, or on a direction of a court, into violation of human rights or negligence in preventing it by a public servant; intervene in court proceedings; visit jails and other institutions to study living conditions; review constitutional and legal safeguards; spread human rights literacy.
- Section 18, steps during and after inquiry: recommend to the Government payment of compensation or damages to the complainant, the victim or the family; recommend prosecution or other action against the officers concerned; approach the Supreme Court or High Court for directions; and recommend immediate interim relief at any stage. The Government must report the action taken within one month, and the Commission publishes its report with the Government's comments.
- Section 36(2): the Commission cannot inquire into a matter more than one year after the act complained of.
The NHRC's recommendations are not binding in the way a decree is, but most are accepted, and the Commission can go to the constitutional courts if they are not. Its work for victims has been most visible in custodial deaths and torture, encounter killings (where it issued guidelines requiring inquiry into every death in a police encounter), bonded labour and the rights of prisoners. In National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 1996 INSC 38, (1996) 1 SCC 742, the Commission itself petitioned the Supreme Court to protect Chakma refugees from expulsion, and the Court issued directions for their protection. In Paramjit Kaur v. State of Punjab, 1998 INSC 357, (1999) 2 SCC 131, the Court referred the Punjab mass cremations to the Commission and held that, acting on such a reference, it functions as a body sui generis and is not limited by the one-year bar.
How this is examined
“Discuss the role of courts in giving compensation to victims” (August 2024) and “Discuss the role of Indian judiciary in giving compensation to victims” (February 2025), both 10 marks; “State Compensation Programmes” (February 2025, short note); “Functions of N.H.R.C.” (August 2024, short note); “Role of courts in protecting victims of crime” (October 2023, short note); and “Administration of victim compensation programmes” (October 2023, August 2024). For the judiciary essay, use sections 1 to 3 in that order and close with the statutory response in section 4. For the NHRC short note, use section 5.
Now try the real questions: Penology and Victimology past question papers.