Summary
Victim compensation under Section 357 CrPC is restitutory and distinct from punitive sentencing; payment cannot purchase reduction of imprisonment. The High Court erred in excusing the remaining sentence upon payment. Nevertheless, considering twelve elapsed years and the compensation already deposited, the Supreme Court declined further imprisonment in this case and ordered an additional Rs.10 lakh, making Rs.15 lakh payable to the complainant. The appeals were disposed of on those terms.
Issues
- Whether payment of victim compensation justified excusing substantive imprisonment.
- What final relief was appropriate given the elapsed time and existing deposit.
Provisions considered
- Section 357, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Victim-focused reparation is independent of imprisonment or fine. It cannot be conflated with sentencing or used as the price of sentence reduction; the operative case-specific relief nevertheless directed further deposits without additional imprisonment. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28)
Held
- Compensation reassures victims that the justice system has not forgotten them and seeks reparation for loss or injury. It is restitutory rather than punitive and stands on a different footing from imprisonment and fine; the convict’s capacity to pay is relevant to compensation, not a basis to purchase a lesser sentence. (¶¶ 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26)
- After affirming conviction under Section 325 IPC and fixing four years’ rigorous imprisonment, the High Court erred by allowing the convicts to avoid the remaining imprisonment upon depositing Rs.2.5 lakh each. Victim compensation could not substitute for the substantive sentence in that manner. (¶¶ 10, 11, 21)
- The Court’s final relief was specific to the circumstances: twelve years had elapsed and Rs.5 lakh was already deposited, so it declined to direct further imprisonment. Each respondent was instead directed to deposit an additional Rs.5 lakh within eight weeks, and the trial court was to disburse the aggregate Rs.15 lakh to the complainant after identification. This operative disposition must be read alongside the Court’s general rejection of compensation as a ground for sentence reduction. (¶¶ 27, 28)
- The appeals were disposed of with these directions and pending applications disposed of. (¶¶ 29, 30)
Result
Appeals disposed of. Further imprisonment declined on the particular facts; additional Rs.10 lakh ordered within eight weeks, with total Rs.15 lakh to be disbursed to the complainant.