ORDER :

The matter comes up for consideration of the application (No. 1/2023) filed on behalf of applicant - Mithlesh Kumar son of deceased Mukesh Kumar with a prayer that the dependents of deceased Mukesh Kumar may kindly be granted compensation under the provisions of Section 357A of Cr.P.C. and the Victim Compensation Scheme from the State Government as well as from the accused of Rs.25,00,000/- jointly or separately.

2. It is noticed that the Trial Court has refused to recommend for compensation under Section 357A of Cr.P.C. while observing that the legal representatives of deceased Mukesh Kumar have already filed a suit before the Civil Court under the provisions of Fatal Accidents Act, 1855.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Trial Court has erred in not recommending compensation solely on the ground that the suit under the provisions of Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 has been filed on behalf of the legal representatives of deceased Mukesh Kumar.

4. It is argued that there is no bar in filing the suit under the provisions of Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 at the instance of the dependents of the person murdered and solely for that reason, the compensation cannot be denied by the Trial Court while exercising powers under Section 357A of Cr.P.C.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Suba Singh & Anr. v. Davinder Kaur & Anr., reported in (2011) AIR (SC) 3163.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Suba Singh (supra) has held as under:-

"12. The contention made on behalf of the Appellants is fully answered by Clauses (b) and (c) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (5) of Section 357 of the Code. In those provisions there is a clear and explicit recognition of a civil suit at the instance of the dependents of a person killed, against his/her killers. In Sub-section (1)(c) of Section 357 there is clear indication that apart from the punishment of fine, the person convicted of any offence of having caused the death of another person or of having abetted the commission of such an offence may also be liable to face a civil action for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 in a suit for damages and Sub- section (5) of Section 357 of the Code makes it all the more clear by stipulating that at the time of awarding compensation in a subsequent civil suit relating to the same matter the court shall take into account any sum paid or recovered as compensation under that section."

7. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Trial Court has wrongly refused to recommend compensation to the dependents of the deceased Mukesh Kumar on the ground that a suit under the Fatal Accidents Act seeking compensation has already been filed.

8. Be that as it may, as per Section 357A of Cr.P.C., every State Government is required to prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependents, who have suffered loss or injury as a result of crime and who require rehabilitation.

9. Under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the State of Rajasthan has enacted a scheme namely Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011 vide Notification dated 05.01.2012.

10. In such circumstances, it was a fit case wherein the Trial Court should have recommended to District Legal Services Authority concerned to consider for providing compensation to the victims while passing the judgment, therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the applicant Mithlesh Kumar S/o Mukesh Kumar to move an application before the District Legal Services Authority, Pratapgarh under Section 357A of Cr.P.C. praying for compensation under Section 357A(3) o