01Facts
The appellant was the father of a 16-year-old victim who was abducted, taken to Mumbai, and sexually assaulted.
pp. 2–6The Special Court convicted the accused of offences under the IPC, the POCSO Act and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. It directed that ₹25,000 from the fine be paid to the victim under Section 357(1)(b) CrPC and recommended a further ₹25,000 from the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Bidar, under the victims’ compensation scheme.
pp. 2–6The appellant challenged the amount recommended under the scheme as inadequate and sought enhanced compensation.
pp. 6–702Issues
i.1. Whether the compensation of ₹25,000 recommended by the Special Court under the Victims Compensation Scheme was inadequate in light of the victim’s age and the sexual assault suffered
pp. 6–10ii.2. Whether the victim was entitled to enhanced compensation under the scheme and, if so, what amount was just and reasonable
pp. 8–1203Law Applied
Section 33(8) of the POCSO Act and Rule 7(2) of the POCSO Rules, 2012 provide for compensation to a child victim in accordance with the applicable victims’ compensation scheme.
p. 5, 8The Court considered the NALSA Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/Other Crimes, 2018, including its compensation range of ₹4,00,000 to ₹7,00,000 for unnatural sexual assault and factors such as the gravity of the offence, harm suffered, treatment expenses, and loss of educational or employment opportunities.
pp. 6–8It also referred to Lalita v. State of Karnataka, which discussed compensation under the scheme and the assessment factors in Rule 9(3).
pp. 8–10The ₹25,000 ordered from the fine under Section 357(1)(b) CrPC was distinct from compensation under the scheme.
pp. 5–7Provisions in the judgment · 9 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 413
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376Section 370
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4Section 12Section 33
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 Section 8Section 10
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 357
04Reasoning
The Court found that the victim was a child aged about 16 when she was subjected to sexual assault, and that the resulting trauma made the Special Court’s recommended scheme compensation of ₹25,000 plainly inadequate.
pp. 9–10Having considered the seriousness of the offence, the victim’s age and the scheme’s compensation framework, the Court determined that ₹6,00,000 was just and reasonable in the circumstances.
pp. 10–11As the victim had attained majority by the time of the appeal, the entire enhanced amount was to be paid directly to her.
p. 1105Holding
The appeal was allowed.
pp. 11–12The Court enhanced the compensation payable to the victim under the Victims Compensation Scheme from ₹25,000 to ₹6,00,000 and recommended that DLSA, Bidar, pay that amount to her.
pp. 11–12The entire amount is payable to the victim, who had attained majority.
pp. 11–12Original Court PDF
SHRI NARAHARIvsTHE MEMBER SECRETARY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
