Supreme Court Mandates Trial Courts to Issue Victim Compensation Orders, Citing Systemic Failures

New Delhi – In a landmark directive aimed at overhauling the victim compensation mechanism in India, the Supreme Court has mandated all Special and Sessions Courts to proactively issue specific orders for compensation in eligible criminal cases. The Court identified the failure of trial courts to make such directions as a primary obstacle preventing victims from accessing their statutory rights, forcing them into a secondary struggle for justice long after the verdict.

The ruling, delivered by a bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan, addresses a critical gap in the criminal justice system where the rehabilitative aspect of justice for victims is often overlooked. The order was passed in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Jyoti Praveen Khandpasole, which brought to light the tragic consequences of this systemic neglect.

"One of the impediments in disbursement of victim compensation is the absence of a direction being issued by the Special Courts or Session Courts to pay compensation to the victims of a crime," the Bench observed. This procedural lapse, coupled with a "lack of awareness," means victims are often left to navigate the complex bureaucratic process of applying for compensation from Legal Services Authorities on their own.

The Tragic Impetus for Judicial Intervention

The PIL, argued by Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, was anchored by the harrowing case of a 25-year-old intellectually-disabled rape survivor from Amravati, Maharashtra. Despite the conviction of her attacker and an explicit order from the trial court for compensation, she faced insurmountable delays and administrative apathy from the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA).

The petition detailed a "catastrophic failure of the State," noting that the victim's mother and sole caregiver passed away in May 2024 while fighting for the funds. The DLSA released only partial compensation in two small installments in March and May 2025—far too late and insufficient to provide any meaningful relief. Tragically, the survivor herself passed away in August 2025, never having received the full compensation intended for her rehabilitation.

This case, the petitioner argued, was not an isolated incident but a reflection of a "recurring national pattern of systemic neglect" that disproportionately harms marginalized victims and undermines the constitutional guarantees of life, dignity, and equality under Articles 14, 15(3), and 21 of the Constitution.

Legal Framework and the Court's Directive

The statutory basis for victim compensation is enshrined in Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which will be succeeded by Section 396 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. These provisions mandate every state government to prepare a Victim Compensation Scheme to provide funds for the rehabilitation of victims or their dependents. The schemes are implemented by State and District Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs/DLSAs) and are supported by the Central Victim Compensation Fund to ensure a degree of uniformity, particularly in heinous crimes like rape, acid attacks, and human trafficking.

Crucially, these statutes empower trial courts—including Special Courts hearing cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act—to recommend compensation at the conclusion of a trial. This power is broad and can be exercised even in cases of acquittal or discharge if the court finds that the victim requires rehabilitation.

Recognizing that this power was being underutilized, the Supreme Court issued a clear and unequivocal directive: "We direct that Special/Sessions Courts ought to pass appropriate directions with regard to payment of victim compensation in appropriate cases, so that the implementation of these directions can be easily made by the State Legal Services Authority through the District Legal Services Authority or the Taluk Legal Services Authority, as the case may be."

Dissemination and Training: Ensuring System-Wide Implementation

To ensure the directive is not lost in administrative channels, the Bench has ordered a multi-pronged approach for its dissemination and enforcement:

1. Nationwide Circulation: The Supreme Court Registry will send a copy of the order to the Registrar Generals of all High Courts.
   
   
2. Judicial Communication: The High Courts are tasked with circulating the order among all Principal District Judges for onward communication to every Special and Sessions Court within their jurisdiction.
3. Judicial Training: The order must also be forwarded to the Directors of all State Judicial Academies. It is to be integrated into the training curriculum for judges to "impress upon the concerned special court judges with regard to the aspect of payment of victim compensation during the course of their training."

This emphasis on judicial education is a critical component of the ruling, aiming to embed the practice of ordering compensation as a standard and non-negotiable part of the sentencing and judgment process.

Analysis and Implications for the Legal Community

This Supreme Court order represents a significant shift from a passive to a proactive judicial role in securing victim rights. For legal practitioners, the implications are manifold:

• For Prosecutors: The onus is now implicitly on public prosecutors to raise the issue of victim compensation during the final stages of a trial and sentencing, ensuring it is on the judge's agenda.
• For Defence Counsel: While advocating for their clients, defence lawyers must be prepared for the court's increased focus on compensation orders, which are independent of the fines imposed on the convict.
• For Legal Aid and Victims' Advocates: The directive strengthens their position immensely. A specific judicial order for compensation streamlines the process significantly, transforming the role of Legal Services Authorities from adjudicators of applications to implementers of court directives. This removes a major layer of bureaucracy and potential delay for the victim.

The judgment elevates victim compensation from a mere post-trial administrative procedure to an integral component of the judicial process. By mandating trial courts to issue these orders, the Supreme Court is not only reinforcing the statutory framework but also reasserting the principles of restorative justice. The goal is to ensure that the justice system's responsibility extends beyond punishing the offender to actively aiding in the rehabilitation and restoration of the victim's life. This decision is a crucial step toward making the promise of victim compensation a tangible reality for those who need it most.

---

Case Title: Jyoti Praveen Khandpasole v. Union of India & Others Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 989 of 2025 Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan