Summary
The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail on condition that the accused pay interim compensation to the victim. The Supreme Court struck down that condition and kept the bail. Victim compensation under Section 357 CrPC arises only when a sentence is imposed after the court's final view on whether the offence was committed. It cannot be imposed before trial. Compensation forms no part of bail jurisprudence, and pre-arrest bail proceedings are not money recovery proceedings, as Sahab Alam, Udho Thakur and Dharmesh had already held.
Issues
- Whether payment of interim victim compensation can be imposed as a condition for the grant of anticipatory bail.
Provisions considered
- Sections 357 and 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 357 provides for compensation when a sentence of fine is imposed or on conviction, and payment is deferred until the appeal period expires or the appeal is decided; compensation is thus simultaneous with the final finding on the offence and cannot be ordered pre-trial in anticipatory bail proceedings. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 12)
Held
- Interim victim compensation cannot form part of bail jurisprudence; following Sahab Alam (bail cannot depend on capacity to deposit money), Udho Thakur (pre-arrest bail proceedings are not money recovery proceedings) and Dharmesh (compensation under Section 357 arises only after trial), the condition directing payment of interim victim compensation was a judicial misadventure and is quashed. (¶¶ 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13)
Result
Criminal Appeal No. 205 of 2023 allowed; the condition in the Jharkhand High Court's order dated 25.11.2021 in A.B.A. No. 6003 of 2020 requiring payment of interim victim compensation quashed, while the other terms of anticipatory bail are maintained; parties to bear their own costs.