Sessions Courts Must Give Compensation to Victims in Sexual Offense Cases Against Minors and Women: Supreme Court
the Supreme Court recently ruled that Sessions Courts must give victim compensation in cases involving bodily harm, especially in sexual assault cases against minors or women, under Section 357-A of the CrPC (now Section 396 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). The Court noted that if the Sessions Court doesn't order compensation, it delays help for victims.
11/6/20241 min read
In Saibaj Noormohammad v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., a Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Pankaj Mithal directed that in cases involving bodily harm, particularly sexual assault on minors and women, Sessions Courts must order victim compensation under Section 357-A of the CrPC (now Section 396 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). The Court emphasized that failure to order compensation delays assistance to victims and instructed legal authorities to ensure swift implementation, including interim compensation when necessary.
The case arose after the appellant, convicted under Sections 376-D and 354 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, challenged the Bombay High Court's decision denying his bail and suspension of sentence. The appellant had been sentenced to 20 years for rape and 10 years under POCSO, but had already served over nine years, exceeding 50% of his sentence.
While granting bail to the appellant, the Supreme Court noted that he had served a substantial portion of his sentence and there was no likelihood of the sentence being increased on appeal. The Court ordered the appellant's release on bail with conditions set by the Sessions Court but made it clear that this would not delay the appeal process.
The Court also addressed the issue of victim compensation, observing that the Sessions Court had not ordered it and stressing the importance of enforcing compensation schemes like Maharashtra’s "Manodhairya Scheme." The Court directed that a copy of its order be sent to all High Courts to ensure Sessions Judges mandate victim compensation in similar cases. The Court further recommended that the High Court consider awarding interim compensation to the victim in this case.
Lastly, the Court acknowledged the valuable contributions of Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde and Advocate Mukund P. Unny in highlighting the importance of victim compensation. The appeal was allowed and disposed of.