Victimology in India: history, the UN Declaration and the legal framework
Penology and Victimology · Unit V · Topic 16 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. History of victimology in India
- Ancient law: Manu and Kautilya provided for payment to the injured and for the king to restore stolen property; restitution was part of punishment.
- Mughal period: diya, blood money paid to the heirs of the victim, could replace retaliation in homicide.
- British period: the State took over prosecution. Section 545 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 allowed a court to pay compensation out of a fine, but it was rarely used.
- The 1973 Code: section 357, recommended by the Law Commission's Forty-first Report (1969), widened the power, allowing compensation even where no fine was imposed. Courts still used it sparingly.
- Judicial phase: from Rudul Sah (1983) the Supreme Court awarded compensation under Articles 32 and 226 for violations by the State, laid down guidelines for rape victims (Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum, 1994), and urged courts to use section 357 liberally (Hari Kishan, 1988). These are discussed in the next note.
- Reports: the Law Commission's 154th Report (1996) recommended a victim compensation scheme; the Malimath Committee (2003) recommended a full set of victims' rights.
- Statutory phase: the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008, in force from 31 December 2009, defined “victim”, gave the victim a right of appeal, allowed an advocate to assist the prosecution and created the Victim Compensation Scheme (section 357A). The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 added sections 357B and 357C. The BNSS, 2023 retained all of these and added rights of information.
2. The UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims, 1985
Adopted by the General Assembly as resolution 40/34 on 29 November 1985, the Declaration is the international charter of victims' rights. It is not a treaty and does not bind as such, but Indian courts and committees have relied on it. Its parts:
- Definition (paragraphs 1 to 3): victims of crime, whether or not the offender is identified or convicted, including family, dependants and those harmed while helping.
- Access to justice and fair treatment (paragraphs 4 to 7): compassion and respect for dignity; prompt redress; information about their role and the progress of the case; allowing their views to be presented and considered at appropriate stages; assistance; protection of privacy and safety; avoidance of unnecessary delay; and informal mechanisms such as mediation and arbitration.
- Restitution (paragraphs 8 to 11): by the offender, as a sentencing option, and by the State where its officials are responsible.
- Compensation (paragraphs 12 and 13): where compensation is not fully available from the offender, the State should endeavour to compensate victims of serious violent crime and families of those killed or incapacitated; national compensation funds should be established.
- Assistance (paragraphs 14 to 17): material, medical, psychological and social assistance; training of personnel.
- Victims of abuse of power (paragraphs 18 to 21): acts not yet criminal in national law but violating internationally recognised human rights norms; States should consider laws providing remedies, including restitution and compensation.
3. The Malimath Committee on victims
The Committee on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System (Justice V.S. Malimath, report of March 2003) found that the victim was the forgotten party in the Indian criminal justice system and recommended that:
- the victim, or his legal representative, have the right to be impleaded as a party in every criminal proceeding where the offence is punishable with seven years or more;
- the victim have the right to be represented by an advocate of his choice, at State expense if he cannot afford one;
- the victim have the right to participate in the trial, to produce evidence, to be informed of the progress of investigation and to be heard on bail and withdrawal of prosecution;
- the victim have the right to appeal against an adverse order, including acquittal or conviction for a lesser offence or inadequate compensation;
- compensation be a right of every victim of serious crime, whether or not the offender is caught or convicted, paid from a Victim Compensation Fund; and
- legal services be extended to victims.
Most of these recommendations have since been enacted in some form, though impleadment as a party has not.
4. The victim's rights under the BNSS
- Definition: section 2(1)(y), including the guardian or legal heir.
- Information: the informant or victim must be told the progress of the investigation within ninety days (section 193(3)(ii), new); the victim, if represented by an advocate, is to be furnished the police report and documents (section 230).
- Participation: an advocate of the victim's choice may assist the prosecution with the court's permission (section 18(8) proviso, old 24(8) proviso); a private advocate may act under the prosecutor's direction (section 338, old 301); the court must hear the victim before allowing withdrawal from prosecution (section 360 proviso, new).
- Appeal: the victim may appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence or inadequate compensation (section 413 proviso, old 372 proviso).
- Compensation and treatment: sections 395, 396 and 397 (old 357, 357A, 357C), set out in the BNSS note on victim compensation and treatment.
- Protection: Witness Protection Scheme (section 398, new).
5. The right to be heard
The Supreme Court has read these provisions broadly. In Mallikarjun Kodagali v. State of Karnataka, 2018 INSC 969, (2019) 2 SCC 752, it held that a victim may appeal against acquittal under the proviso to section 372 as of right, without seeking leave, and that the right is a substantive one. In Jagjeet Singh v. Ashish Mishra, 2022 INSC 427, (2022) 9 SCC 321, arising out of the Lakhimpur Kheri killings, it set aside bail granted without hearing the victims, holding that a victim has a legally vested right to be heard at every step after the occurrence of an offence, including bail, and that the victim is distinct from the informant or complainant.
How this is examined
“History of victimology in India” (August 2024, short note); “Discuss the concept of victimology in Indian context” (October 2023, 10 marks); “Victims rights to be heard” (October 2023, short note); “Justice Dr. V.S. Malimath Commission Report on Victims Compensation” (February 2025, short note); and “Explain the legal provisions/legal response for compensation to victims in India” (August 2024, February 2025). For the Malimath note, use section 3. For the right to be heard, sections 4 and 5. For the compensation essay, combine section 1 here with the BNSS note on sections 395 to 397 and the next note on the courts.
Now try the real questions: Penology and Victimology past question papers.