ORDER :

1. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (‘KSLSA’) being aggrieved by the order of the LIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’) passed in Spl.CC.No.431/2017, dated 02.11.2017, directing the KSLSA to pay compensation of Rs.35,000/-to the victim.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/KSLSA and learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1/Police as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2/accused.

3. The case of the petitioner/KSLSA is that respondent No.1/Police filed charge sheet against respondent No.2-accused for the offence punishable under Section 354-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’). The Trial Court, after framing the charges against respondent No.2/accused and during the course of trial, on the application filed by the public prosecutor, altered the charges in respect of Section 354-A of IPC and discharged respondent No.2/accused for the offence punishable under the POCSO Act. After the trial, the Trial Court found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 354-A of IPC and sentenced respondent No.2/accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 months and to pay fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The Trial Court further directed to pay compensation after collecting fine amount from the accused and gave set-off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. for the sentence already undergone by the accused. Further, relying upon the provisions of Rule 7(2) and Rule 7(4) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Rules, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Rules’), the Trial Court directed the KSLSA to pay the compensation of Rs.35,000/-in addition to the compensation already awarded under Section 357 of Code of Criminal Procedure, (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’). The same is challenged by the KSLSA before this Court in this revision petition.

4. Smt. B.V. Vidyulatha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-KSLSA contended that as per Section 357 of Cr.P.C., the Trial Court has power to award compensation to the victim out of the fine amount that was already ordered, but as per Section 357-A of Cr.P.C., the victim compensation shall be paid in accordance with the Karnataka Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011 of the Government and the quantum of the compensation amount cannot be fixed by the Court. The same has to be fixed by the DLSA after making enquiry and considering the injury sustained by the victim as per the Schedule mentioned in the said Scheme. She further contended that in this case, the Trial Court has already discharged respondent No.2/accused for the offence under the POCSO Act. Therefore, the Trial Court cannot direct the KSLSA to pay compensation and also contended that absolutely there is no injury sustained by the victim in this case. Therefore, the question of awarding additional compensation under Section 357-A of Cr.P.C. does not arise and hence, prayed for setting aside the order.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader also supports the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. However, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the State has not preferred any revision or appeal before this Court against the judgment passed by the Trial Court. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/accused submits that the accused had already deposited Rs.15,000/-fine amount imposed by the Trial Court.

6. Upon hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the only question that arises for consideration of this Court is as under:

“Whether the Trial Court has power to fix the quantum of compensation under the POCSO Act or under Section 357A of Cr.P.C., by ignoring the POCSO Rules