New Delhi, Jan 17 (IANS) The Supreme Court has held that while sentencing an accused, the courts should not only strike a balance between needs of the society and fairness to the accused but also award just compensation to the victim of crime.
"The court has to give attention not only to the nature of crime, prescribed sentence, mitigating and aggravating circumstances to strike just balance in needs of society and fairness to the accused, but also to keep in mind the need to give justice to the victim of crime," said a bench of Justice T.S.Thakur and Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel in their judgment Friday.
The court said that the "order of sentence in a criminal case needs due application of mind" and the "just compensation to the victim has to be fixed having regard to the medical and other expenses, pain and suffering, loss of earning and other relevant factors".
Pointing out that justice to the victim often gets overlooked, Justice Goel, speaking for the bench, said: "In spite of legislative changes and decisions of this court, this aspect at times escapes attention."
"Rehabilitating the victim is as important as punishing the accused. Victim's plight cannot be ignored even when a crime goes unpunished for want of adequate evidence," he said.
"While punishment to the accused is one aspect, determination of just compensation to the victim is the other. At times, evidence is not available in this regard. Some guess work in such a situation is inevitable," the judgment said.
The court said that the compensation was payable under Section 357 and 357-A of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
While under section 357, financial capacity of the accused has to be kept in mind, section 357-A under which compensation comes out of state funds, has to be invoked to make up the requirement of just compensation, said the court, while upholding an appeal by Manohar Singh against the Rajasthan High Court's Nov 23, 2011 verdict acquitting 10 accused given varying period of sentences by the trial court for assaulting four people Oct 29, 1980 over a land dispute.
The court said it may not be appropriate to award any sentence of imprisonment to any accused and at best compensation may be directed to be paid by the accused or the state to the appellant.
"In the present case, in the absence of any evidence about the medical expenses, loss of earning etc. and the financial capacity of the accused, we are of the view that the appellant (Mahohar Singh) needs to be paid a sum of Rs.50,000 as compensation under section 357(3) within two months by the surviving respondents (assailant accused)."
The fifth and final T20 match between India and South Africa on Sunday was canceled due to rain i
Sai Pallavi: Sai Pallavi wanted to become a doctor, not an actress, know how her destiny changed
At present, South Cinema is hoisting the flag of its success not only in India but in the whole w
Punjabi singer Diljit Dosanjh recently made headlines after he received a legal notice from the T
NEET-JEE Exams Date: Waiting for students to end, exam dates announced tomorrow
New Delhi: Relieving students seeking admission to the country's prestigious engineering and medi
Recognition good for cryptology in India: Bimal Roy on Padma Shri
Kolkata, Jan 26 (IANS) Statistician Bimal K. Roy, who has been named for the Padma Shri award -
The Supreme Court resumed hearing the stray dog issue on Thursday. The Supreme Court focuse
IPL 2024: Virat Kohli's stormy innings kept RCB in the playoff race, Punjab Kings' hopes dashed
Royal Challengers Bangalore defeated Punjab Kings by 60 runs in the 58th match of IPL 2024 on Thu
After the release of the detailed program of Uttar Pradesh Joint Entrance Examination Polytechnic
Adopt New Methods to Boost Agri-Production: Modi
Suratgarh (Rajasthan), Feb 19 (IANS) Prime Minister Narendra Modi Thursday said there is a need
Samsung Galaxy F62 with 7000mAh battery, get up to Rs 7000 discount, do not let go by hand
If you use a smartphone more and you are fond of gaming then you will need a phone with a big and
