qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe

rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa
sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
CRIMINOLOGY
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz
Victimology
xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert
yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert
yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopas
Aamna Khan, Roll No. 01, 5th Semester

VICTIMOLGY

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF VICTIMOLOGY

The Early Roots

The word victim has its roots in many ancient languages that covered a great distance from
northwestern Europe to the southern tip of Asia and yet had a similar linguistic pattern: victima
in Latin; vh, woh, wg in Old European; wh, whi in Old High German; v in Old Norse;
weihs in Gothic; and, vinak ti in Sanskrit (Websters 1971).
Victimology as an academic term contains two elements:
One is the Latin word Victima which translates into victim.
The other is the Greek word logos which means a system of knowledge, the direction of
something abstract, the direction of teaching, science, and a discipline.
Although writings about the victim appeared in many early works by such criminologists as
Beccaria (1764), Lombroso (1876), Ferri (1892), Garfalo (1885), Sutherland (1924), Hentig
(1948), Nagel (1949), Ellenberger (1955), Wolfgang (1958) and Schafer (1968), the concept of a
science to study victims and the word victimology had its origin with the early writings of
Beniamin Mendelsohn (1937; 1940), these leading to his seminal work where he actually
proposed the term victimology in his article A New Branch of Bio-Psycho-Social Science,
Victimology (1956). It was in this article that he suggested the establishment of an international
society of victimology which has come to fruition with the creation of the World Society of
Victimology, the establishment of a number of victimological institutes (including the creation
here in Japan of the Tokiwa International Victimology Institute); and, the establishment of
international journals which are now also a part of this institute. Mendelsohn provided us with
his victimology vision and blueprint; and, as his disciples we have followed his guidance. We
now refer to Mendelsohn as The Father of Victimology.

Critical Dates in Victimology1

1924 Edwin Sutherland includes a chapter on victims in his criminology textbook.
1937 Beniamin Mendelsohn publishes his writings on the rapist and his victim.
1941 Hans von Hentig publishes article on victim and criminal interactions.
1947 Beniamin Mendelsohn coins the term victimology in a French journal.
1948 Hans von Hentig publishes his book The Criminal and His Victim.
1949 Frederic Wertham first used the word victimology in a book Show of Violence.
1957 Margery Fry proposes victim compensation in the London Times.
1958 Marvin Wolfgang studies homicide victims; uses the term victim precipitation.
1963 New Zealand enacts the first Criminal Compensation Act.
1965 California is the first state in the USA to start Victim Compensation.
1966 Japan enacts Criminal Indemnity Law.
1966 USA starts to survey crime victims not reported to the police
1967 Canada creates a Criminal Compensation Injuries Act as does Cuba and Switzerland.
1968 Stephan Schafer writes the first victimology textbook The Victim and His Criminal.
1972 The first three victim assistance programmes are created in St. Louis, Missouri, San
Francisco, California and in Washington, D. C.
1973 the first international symposium on victimology is held in Jerusalem, Israel.
1974 the first police-based victim advocate project is started in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA.
1975 The first Victim Rights Week is organized by the Philadelphia District Attorney,
* Associate Professor, Criminology Department, California State University, Fresno; Director, Tokiwa
International Victimology Institute, Tokiwa University Victimology Graduate School, Japan.

1980 Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) is founded by Candi Lightner after one of her
twin daughters was killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender.
1981 President Ronald Reagan proclaims the first national Victims Rights Week in April.
1982 the first Victim Impact Panel established by MADD to educate drunk drivers about how
their victims suffered, started in Rutland, Massachusetts, USA.
1984 The Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) establishes the national Crime Victims Fund from
federal crime fines to pay for state victim compensation and services.
1

http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/RS_No70/No70_12VE_Dussich.pdf

1985 The United Nations unanimously adopts the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for
Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
1987 The US Department of Justice opens the National Victims Resource Centre in Rockville,
Maryland.
1988 The first Indian Nations: Justice for Victims of Crime conference is held by the Office
for Victims of Crime in Rapid City, South Dakota, USA.
1990 The European Forum for Victim Services was founded by all the national organizations in
Europe working for victims of crime in consultative status with the Council of Europe and the
UN.
1999 The United Nations and the US Office for Victims of Crime publish the Guide for
Policymakers on the Implementation of the United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of
Justice for Victims of
Crime and Abuse of Power and the Handbook on Justice for Victims: On the Use and
Application of the United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime
and Abuse of Power.
2002 On 11 April, 66 the Rome Statute was ratified & went into force on 1 July at which time
the International Criminal Court became effective and it included the creation of a Victim and
Witness Unit.
2003 On October 2nd the Tokiwa International Victimology Institute, in Mito Japan opened its
doors to promote victim rights, to conduct seminars, courses, publish an international journal,
and host annual symposia and lectures and research about victimology.
2004 The World Society of Victimology at its annual Executive Committee meeting in Orlando,
Florida adopts a dramatic new strategic plan to commit itself to the ideals and promises of the
UN Declaration.
2005 Japan puts the UN Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power
into their national legislation by adopting a new fundamental law for crime victims. To ensure
that the principles would be initiated, the Prime Minister established a cabinet level committee.
The new law includes services for victims, restitution from the offender, information about
criminal justice and a right to formally participate in the criminal justice process.

Nature of Victimology
Strange and ironically as it may sound, the administration of criminal justice is not much
concerned with the victims of crime except that in few cases some marginal action is possible to
render very limited help to the sufferers.
The entire focus of the criminal justice system is on the offender; to punish him or seek his
reformation and rehabilitation with all the sources and goodwill available through the courts and
other governmental and non-governmental agencies. Efforts are made to understand his
personality and the individual and social factors which might have contributed to his criminal
behavior; the victims of the crime are on the other hand, the forgotten people in the system.
Crime affects a large number of victims who suffer physical, social, financial or emotional injury
or harm which needs to be redressed by providing them easy access to justice. Though, the
victims of crime have generally found support and assistance from their family, tribe or
community2, they have by and large, remained forgotten persons in the criminal justice
administration system. It is only in recent decades that the impact of criminal law jurisdictions
around the world and they were convinced that the victims needed to be treated with compassion
and their dignity and fundamental rights must be protected and preserved.
According to President Gerald R Ford, for too long the law has centered its attention more on
the rights of the criminal than on the victims of crime. It is high time we reversed this trend and
put the highest priority on the victims and potential victims.

Victimology Definition and Meaning3

2

Date collected and derived during a period of time. Ref. to news article no.2 attached at the
end.
3
Andrew Karman : Crime victims: An Introduction to victimology (2003) p.7

Etymologically, Victimology means scientific study of victims. Broadly speaking, victimology

may be defined as the scientific study of victimization, including the relationship between
victims and offenders, the interactions between victims and criminal justice system; that is, the
police and courts, and correctional officers. It includes connection between victims and other
social groups and institutions, such as the media, business and social movement. Therefore
victim of crime is the person who has suffered at the hands of perpetrators of crime.
Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary defines Victim as, a person who has been attacked,
injured, or killed as the result of a crime, a disease, an accident etc. and also a person who has
been targeted.
The origin of victimology as a part of criminology can be traced back to 1940s when founders
of this branch of knowledge, notably, Mendelsohn, Von Henting and Wolfgang. They brought in
the term victim precipitation, which meant blaming the victim himself/ herself for his/her
victimization4. But only later the term victim in the 1980s after feminist protest it was
interpreted in a wider sense to include anyone caught up in an asymmetric relationship or
situation. The word asymmetry connotes anything imbalanced, exploitative, parasitical,
oppressive, disturbing, alienating or having inherent suffering.
Victimology deals exclusively with the victims of crime who needs to be treated with
compassion and rendered compensation and assistance under the criminal justice system. While
criminology is concerned mainly with the causation of crime, victimology is primarily with the
study as to why people fall a victim to crime and how they can be helped and assisted against
abuse of power or criminal acts of offenders through access to criminal justice system. The study
also outlines the steps to be taken to prevent victimization against crimes and provide legal
remedies to the victims of crime.

Victims of Crime:
4

E.g., vulgur postures or indecent exposure by women.

The expression victims of crime refer to any person, group or entity who has suffered injury,
harm or loss due to illegal activity of someone. The harm or the injury may be physical,
psychological or financial. Such a person may be called a primary victim of crime. Besides,
there may also be secondary victims who suffer injury or harm as a result of injury or harm to
the primary victim. For instance, the children of a raped women suffering from lack of paternity
and called bastards.
There may also be tertiary victims who experience harm or injury due to criminal act of offender.
For instance in case of communal riots the Muslims who are killed, injured or whose property is
ransacked are the primary victims of the crime whereas the dependents and relatives of the
deceased or injured persons are secondary victims. Beside these, the hatred culminated for
Muslim community by perpetrators of communal tension and riot generates hate phobia and fear
of violence among the Muslim members. It needs special mention though that it cannot be
assumed that secondary and tertiary victims necessarily suffer fewer traumas than the primary
victims. They may also face the physical, psychological and emotional pain similar to that of the
primary victims.
The study of victims of crime and specially the reason why some people are more vulnerable to
victimization of than others, constitute the core subject of study for victimologists around the
world. The expression victims of crime has been defined in section 2 (wa) 5 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. It defines Victim as A person who suffers directly or threatened
physical, emotional or pecuniary harm as a result of commission of a crime, or in the case of a
victim being an institutional entity, any of the similar harm by an individual or authorized
representative of another entity or group who are essentially covered under civil or
constitutional law and deserves assistance by the criminal justice system.
The UN General Assembly Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims and Abuse of
Power, which was adopted in Nov., 1985 contains an exhaustive definition of victim of crime in
Article 1 and 2 which reads as :
Article 1: Victim means those who individually or collectively, have suffered harm including
physical or mental injury, emotional suffering , economic loss or substantial impairment of their
5

Inserted by Cr.P.C. (Amendment) Act, 2008

fundamental rights, though acts or omission that are in violation of criminal laws operative
within member states including those prescribing criminal abuse of power.
Article 2: A person may be considered a victim under this declaration, regardless of whether the
perpetrator is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or convicted and regardless of the familial
relationship between the perpetrator and the victim. The term victim also include, where
appropriate, the immediate family or the dependents of the victim and persons who have suffered
harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization.

Character trait of Victims:

General characteristics among victims as pointed out by Hans Von Henting (1948) are as follow:
1. The innocent who fell a victim to crime being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
2. The depressive type who are easy target, being careless and unsuspecting. They mostly
contribute to their own injury.
3. The greedy type who are easily duped because of craze for money and easy gain.
4. The wanton type who are particularly vulnerable to stresses of life such as juveniles,
pregnant women, prostitutes etc.
5. The tormentor type who are victims of attack from the target of their abuse such as
battered women, or those in live-in relationship.

Theories of Victimology:
With the advancement of victimological studies, the theory of victim precipitation came to be
perceived as a negative approach to victim because it only focused on how victims own
contribution led to his victimization. Therefore, most of the criminologists refuse to accept this
theory, it being destructive in nature.
Marvin Wolfgang, who opposed this theory of victim precipitation, believed in the
phenomenon, of victim facilitation rather than victim blaming. He did not blame the victim
but asserted that the interactions of the victim make him/her vulnerable to a crime. Thus, the idea
behind victim facilitation is to study the elements that make victim more accessible or vulnerable
to a crime attack.

Benjamin Meldsohn propounded a three model theory of victimology and observed that the
conditions that precipitate crime can be classified into three general categories as follows:
1. In terms of time and space, the victim being in the wrong place at a wrong time.
2. Attracting factors and life style also create a fertile ground for incidence of crime.
3. There are certain pre-disposing factors such as being too young, being too poor, being in
minority, being unemployed etc. which may lead to the victimization of a person to a
crime.
Penal couple concept said that when crime takes place, it has two partners, one the offender,
and the other, the victim, who provides an opportunity to the criminal to commit the crime. The
victim is thus a participant in the crime and therefore, he should bear some responsibility for
crime.
Later, Cohen and Felson (1979) came out with their Routine Activities Theory, which presupposes that a crime occurs when three conditions come together, namely (1) suitable target (2)
motivated offender(s) and (3) absence of security or parental care or guardianship.
Earlier when criminology was in its emerging state, victimolgy simply meant study of crime
from the prospective of the victim. Mendolsohn and Von Henting were the first to explore the
possibility of developing victimology as an independent branch of criminology and therefore,
they are considered as the Fathers of victimology.

Vulnerable persons need special and greater attention, they are:

1. Elderly victims: In western countries elderly persons tend to be in lower income groups,
and therefore, have to live in dubious and criminal neighborhoods. Again many of them live

10

alone and repeated victimization is possible in their case. These factors may not be much
relevant in traditional countries like India where elderly people by and large live with their
children and they do not generally have to face any peculiar problems relating to safety.
2. Child victims: they need special attention and apt handling by the law enforcement agencies
which may prove to be even more damaging than the crime committed against the child; a
factor which may discourage the intention of the proceeding by the parents of the child
victim. Some special measures are therefore called for which may do away with the
appearance and the cross examination of the child in law courts.
3. Victims of Sexual offence: offence against women is one of the serious cases at present
which is ever increasing. Perhaps this class of victim irrespective of age deserves the
maximum consideration in view of the emotional, psychological and human problems
involved. The police and court proceedings maybe as traumatic as the offence itself leading
to these proceedings. The feeling is almost universal among the victims that instead of being
treated as victims they are treated by police and law agencies as if they themselves are the
culprits. The rulers of criminal law and the evidence are for all practical purposes are titled
against the victims as evident by the requirements given below.
1. It is for the prosecution to prove the lack of consent on the part of victim; an element not
easily provable especially when the accused is not a stranger to the victim. The court
often insists that the proof be offered of resistance by the victim.
2. The credit of the rape victim may be impeached hat she was generally of immoral
character. Highly humiliating and scandalous questions are often put to the victim despite
the legal bar against such questions.
In this view some changes have been brought for the good. Two new provisions have been
added in the IPC. Disclosing the identity of the offence of rape has been made punishable.
Proceedings in a rape trial are to be held in camera. A new provision has been introduced in
the Evidence Act lying down the presumption that there is no consent of the victim of rape if
the offence was committed by the husband during judicial separation from the victim and in
case where the offence was committed while the victim was in the custody of police or in
hospital or in a rehabilitation homes.
4. Female Victims: in the western societies, the issues regarding criminality against women
generally pertain and are confined to sexual offences but in the Indian setting, women are

11

exposed to gang rape by policemen and dominant class. Wife beating, child prostitution and
even occasional witch hunting is also prevalent. Legislation exists and is reinforced from
time to time to meet the challenges posed by some of the above mentioned maladies but
effective enforcement of the laws is not forthcoming. Crimes against women, particularly
dowry deaths, are increasing at a rapid pace. There has also been an increase in incidents of
molestation of girl student in buses and eve-teasing is rampant in Universities. Dowry death
caused by the husband and in-laws of the helpless women, who are unable to fulfill their
inflated expectation based on greed and are given the color of suicide. Despite some well
meaning legislation to help the prosecution, it is necessary to secure conviction of the
offenders in majority of the cases.
5. Minority groups and weaker sections: they are generally the worst suffers. The
phenomenon is almost universal and a typical example is provided by India where
communal strife due to variety of causes poses a perennial problem. A number of caste and
communal riots occur each year in the country leading to large scale murder, rape,and
destruction and looting of property in which the main sufferers obviously are those
belonging to minority and weaker section and this is irrespective to the fact that as to who
was responsible for the flare-up in the first instance. The greater the tragedy, the lesser is the
possibility of the protection of the victims and of punishment to the perpetuators of the
ghastly crimes.
6. Consumer Victims: consumer of various goods and services are quite often the victims of
the unscrupulous practices of the manufacturers, traders, contractors and members of other
professional and occupational groups. Though civil and criminal laws are in plenty, as are
warranties and guaranties given to protect the consumer, they do not serve much useful
purpose in actual practice. Consumer protection act is the most recent and significant
legislation on the subject. It is very comprehensive and all kinds of goods and services are
brought under it. Under the act advisory and adjudicating bodies known as consumer
protection council are to be set-up at center and state levels in order to serve the purpose they
have been assigned. Adjudicating bodies are to be set up at district, state and national level
with jurisdiction upto rupee and lakhs and above.

12

Impact of Victimization:
The impact of crime on victim maybe physical, financial or psychological.
Physical impact: the victim is likely to experience a number of physical reactions to crime to
which he has fallen a victim. These may include hyper-tension, increased heart beats, numbness,
grief, sadness etc. at the time of crime being committed against a person, he/she has to choose
between fight or flight, that is either to fight against the perpetrator of crime and offer
resistance or the subdue and meekly fall a prey to his criminal act. Many a times, the physical
reaction may not occur until the treat or danger has passed away and the victim may suffer from
mental trauma at a later stage when his memory returns and he may suffer the distress or shock
even throughout his/her life.
Financial impact: The financial impact of crime on the victim may be in anyone or more of the
following forms:1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Costs and expenses incurred in medical treatment for physical injuries:

Damage to property or articles in possession;
Litigation cost incurred in fighting against the crime and criminal i.e., perpetrator.
Employment loss or financial suffering due to loss of earnings.
Funeral or burial expenses, if any.

In some cases, the victim may be compelled to move or shift elsewhere for security or other
reasons.
Psychological impact: where the victim is confronted with the crime perpetrator immediate
reaction will be anger or fear depending on his physical strength and capacity to face the
misfortune. Shock and mental trauma follow subsequently after the crime has been committed
and the victim regains senses and is able to recapulate as to how he has been victimized. He gets
so much distressed that he losses self confidence and self-esteem and life seems to have no
meaning for him.
The psychological impact of victimization is clearly reflected in behavioral response of the crime
victim, which may include increased alcoholism, excessive use of drugs, segregation of social
relationships, and avoidance of peoples contact or social withdrawal and so on. There may,

13

however, be some victims who are able to shed aside their distress and shock and return to
normal life in course of time.
The capacity of victims to cope with the effect of crime depending on his/her mental frame.
While some victims may not be so affected. The PTSD assumes a more serious form when
victim finds that he/she is not believed or people do not want to share her horrible experiences
and attribute his/her victimization to his/her own fault or carelessness. This is more true in case
of a rape victim when people blame her for having walked alone or dressed attractively.

An Accused Oriented System to Victim Oriented.

For example when the accused is arrested for committing an offence, immediately the ground of
arrest must be communicated to his relatives and in every 24 hours he is to be examined by a
doctor. In trial stage if the accused is rich and powerful he threatens the victim and his witnesses
not to depose against him. In most of the cases we have seen when the witness appears before the
court, he does not speak the truth due to the threat perception and the accused gets the order of
acquittal. The government should come up with legislation to ensure the safety and security of
the victim and witness so that they can depose before the court without any fear and that would
ensure fair trial as enriched in Article 21 of the constitution of India. That apart, if the accused is
a rich man can engage an expensive lawyer to defend him but unfortunately the victim has to
depend on the public prosecutor who does not have any match with the defense lawyer and
ultimately the accused gets acquitted. Even if the victim engages a good lawyer; he cannot argue
the case simply he can assist the public prosecutor. During trial the accused can cross-examine
the victim and witness; but the victim does not have any right to examine the accused. In my
view, the present criminal justice system is accused paradise.
On conclusion of trial when the accused is found guilty for committing offence, the accused is to
be heard on the point of sentences. The court has to consider his social status; source of income,
dependency etc and mitigating circumstances has to be given more weightaged than the
aggravating circumstances. But the victim is not heard. Suppose when a sole earning member of
the family is killed and the accused is caught and he is convicted, the victim does not get any
monetary compensation for survival of his family.

14

Legislation conferred jurisdiction on criminal courts under section 357(3) of the code of criminal
procedure for awarding unlimited amount of compensation to the victims at the time of passing
judgment of conviction. By the landmark judgment in Hari Kisans case AIR 1988 SC 2127,
SC not only awarded compensation of 50,000/- but also directed the subordinated courts to
exercise the power of awarding compensation to the victims of offence in such a liberal way that
the victim may not have to rush to civil courts for compensation to the victims. Unfortunately it
has been rarely invoked. According to UN General Assembly state is ought to pay
compensation when offender or other sources are not fully available because the state is under a
duty to protect the life, liberty and security of its citizen.
Therefore criminal justice system to an extent can be said to be favorable to an accused but the
scenario is fast changing and courts and legislation is incorporating changes in the procedural
law as well as substantive law.

Actual Crime and Crime reported: showing relation between the Administration and the
Victim.
One important and basic factor in the administration of criminal justice is the victims decision as
to whether he would invoke the judicial process. In the U.S.A every victimization survey
conducted since 1967 has shown that total crime is 2 to 3 times higher than the amount of crime
known to the police. Crime reporting to the police would obviously depend to a great extent on
the victims perception regarding the police efficiency and the likely response from them. It was
found that 35% of the robbery is and aggravated assaults, 42% of burglaries, 40% of the theft and
11% of the vehicle theft were not reported to the police. The most common reason given was
police could not do anything about the matter, the victim was not sure whether the real
offender would be caught and the police would not want to be bothered. Police may not be
the only inhibiting factor constituting obstacles to the invocation of criminal law process by the
victims. The victims continue to suffer at all stages subsequent to the reporting to the police,
during investigation and processing of the case by the police and even during the trial by the
court. The suffering of the victims witness in terms of harassment and humiliation, various kinds

15

of inconveniences and, at the top, the financial losses may be quite formidable. Therefore
criminal justice system has far to go in order to repair its relations with the victims.

Victims assistance program:

The UN hand book on justice for victim has outlined a comprehensive victim assistance scheme
for the redress, relief and rehabilitation of the victims of crime. He crime victims need and
support to pull them out of the emotional trauma and physical and financial injuries suffered by
them. They also deserve support for participating in criminal justice process and compensatory
relief from the offender and/or the government. The main objective of the victims assistance
program may be stated as follows:1. Victim of crime deserve respect for their dignity, privacy and personal liberty;
2. Victim need assistance and support to cope with the aftermath of their victimization and
their alienation from the society should be prevented;
3. The cost of policing, criminal justice, correlative measures and of course, the reparation
for loss of property or injury to person including medical treatment cost etc. should be
recoverable by the victim from the offender or the state or from both;
4. Victim being the first hand witness and the main source of information about crime and
criminal, his version (statement) is of crucial importance for police, prosecutors and
courts. Therefore, the testimony of victims should be properly weighed and evaluated and
not easily discarded;
5. While accepting the plea bargaining under section 265-A of the code of Criminal
procedure, 1973, the claims of victim(s) should not be ignored in an anxiety to dispose of
the case promptly;
6. The constitutional and human rights of the victim of crime should be legally
safeguarded.6

Position around the World:

The French criminal justice system entitle all the parties who suffer injuries or damages as a
result of crime, to be impleaded as parties right from the beginning of the investigation. The
supreme court of the US recognized the rights of crime victim for the first time in the case of
6

Mexico has amended its constitution to include rights of victims of crime.

16

Payne v. Tennessee7 at the sentencing stage of the trial. It marks the beginning of judicial
recognition of the rights of victims and need for restorative justice for them. It has now been
accepted as an indispensible aspect of the American criminal justice system. A victim impact
panel is formed in which the crime victim (relatives of deceased victim) meets with the offender
after his conviction and tells him about the impact of crime and asks for restoration.
More recently, an international association called the South Asian Society of Criminology and
Victimology (SASCV) has been founded in February 2011, to nature and promote criminological
and victimological knowledge in South Asian countries such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Bhutan, India, Pakistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Nepal. The countries share their best practices
in order to develop understanding of criminology and victimology as two important branches
connected with criminal justice system. It is generally accepted that South Asian countries are
facing acute problems of corruption, criminal violence, terrorism, extremism, white caller crime
and cyber crimes, human rights violations, victimization etc.

Position of Victim of Crime under Indian Law

The expression has been defined in section 2 (wa) of the CrPC, 1973. The development of
victimology in India is still in its early stages like most other developing countries. With the
emergence of PIL in higher courts attention was drawn to this lacuna in the Criminal Justice
System. Expressing concerns for the plight of victims of crime Justice V.R. Krishna Iyar
commented, the criminal law in India is not victim oriented and the suffering of victim, often
immeasurable are entirely overlooked in misplaced sympathy for the criminal. Though our
modern criminal law is designed to punish as well as reform the criminals, yet it overlooks the
by-product of crime e.g., the victim.
The Supreme Court has reiterated time and again, that a prisoner, be he a convict or an under trial
or a detenue, does not cease to be human being even when lodged in jail and therefore, he
continues to be entitle to all his fundamental rights including right to life guarantee under Article
21 of the constitution. As such he cannot be deprived of his right to liberty in accordance with
the procedure established by law, even after his conviction and imprisonment in jail. But no such
7

501 U.S. 908 (1991).

17

concern is shown for the poor victim of crime who is left to suffer I the aftermath of the crime
except awarding him monetary compensation in certain cases.
But over the last few decades the situation has become better. In response of the U.N
Declaration, in India the Code of Criminal Procedure was amended in 2009 as to widen the
definition of victim as contained in sec.2 (wa) of the code. The term victim means a person who
has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused
person has been charged and includes his/her guardian or legal heir.

Compensation relief to victims under various Indian laws:

Under CrPC, 1973: Sub-section (1) and (3) of section 357 of CrPC vest power in the trial court
to award compensation to victim of crime whereas similar power is conferred to the appellant
and revisional court under sub-section (4). The court may appropriate the whole or any portion of
fine recorded from the offender to be paid as compensation to the victim of crime.
The compensation ordered to be paid under section 357(1) may be for costs, damage or injury
suffered or loss caused due to death or monetary loss incurred due theft or destruction of
property etc.
Sub-section (3) further empowers the court, in its discretion, to order the accused to pay
compensation to the victim of his crime, even though no fine has been imposed on him.
It is significant to note that new section357-A has been inserted by CrP.C. (Amendment) Act,
2008 (5 of 2009) with effect from December 31, 2009, which invisages Victim Compensation
Scheme. This section reads as under:357-A. Victim Compensation Scheme. (1) Every state Government in coordination with the
Central Government, shall 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 the crime and who
requires rehabilitation.
(2) Whenever recommendation is made by the court for compensation, the district legal service
authority or the state legal authority, as the case may be, shall decide the quantum of
compensation to be awarded under the scheme referred to in sub-section (1).

18

(3) if the trial court, at the conclusion of trial, is satisfied, that the compensation awarded under
section 357 is not adequate for such rehabilitation, or where the cases end in acquittal for such
rehabilitation, or where the cases end in acquittal or discharge and the victim has to be
rehabilitated, it may make recommendation for compensation.
(4) Where the offender is not traced or identified, but the victim is identified, and where no trial
takes place, the victim or his dependent may make an application to the state or the DLSA for
award of compensation.
(5) On receipt of such recommendations or on the application under sub-heading;
(6) the state or district legal service authority, as the case may be, to alleviate the suffering of the
victim, may order for immediate first aid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of
cost on the certificate of the police officer not below the rank of officer in charge of the police
station or a magistrate of the area concerned, or any other interim relief as the appropriate
authority deem fit.
The scheme contained in the section is indeed a progressive measure to ameliorate the woes of
crime victims and providing them restorative relief.
The code also provides compensatory relief to victims of unlawful arrest or detention by the
police without sufficient cause.8
Where an accused is convicted of a non-cognizable offence on a complaint, the court may order
him to pay costs to the complainant or in default, suffer simple imprisonment for a period not
exceeding thirty days.9

Compensation under Probation of Offenders Act: it also contains provisions for

compensatory relief to victim of crime under section 5(1) of the Act. The section provides that
the court directing the release of an offender under section 3 or section 4 of the Act, may if deem
fit, further direct the accused to pay such compensation to the victim, as the court thinks
reasonable for the loss or injury caused to the latter, as also the cost of the proceedings.
8
9

Section 358 (1) Cr.P.C.

Section 359 (1)

19

Compensation to victim under Motor Vehical Act:

The victims of vehicular accidents or their legal representatives in case of death of the victim are
entitled to claim compensation from the offender under section 5 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.
However, the power in this regard is vested only with the trial court and none else.
Compensation relief to victims Judicial Trend:
The contribution of judiciary to redress the claim of victims of crime is no less significant. The
higher courts have played a dominant role in assuring compensatory justice to the victims of
crime. While rewarding such compensatory relief, they have exercised due care and caution to
ensure that peoples faith in judicial process is not shattered and the victims protective rights are
not denied to them. Some of the landmark judgments of the Supreme Court ensuring restorative
justice to victims of crime reflect the growing concern of judiciary to protect the rights of
victims.
Elaborating the scope of award of compensation to victim of crime under section 358 of Cr.P.C.,
Justice V.Y. Chandrachud CJI (as he then was), in Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar10, observed that
a person is entitled to compensation for loss or injury caused by the offence, and it includes the
wife, husband, parent and children of the deceased victim.
The Apex Court in Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab 11, enumerated the factors which the courts
should take into consideration while ordering award of compensation to the victim of crime.
These factors include capacity of the accused to pay, nature of the offence and the nature of
injury suffered by the victim as also the overfall effect of the crime on the victims famililial and
social life and emotional or financial loss caused to him/her. The court ruled that the quantum of
compensation must be reasonable, depending upon the facts, circumstances and justness of
victims claim. The accused must be given reasonable time for payment of compensation and if
necessary, it must be ordered to be paid in instatements.
In Bhim Singh v. State of J&K 12, the Apex Court observed that compensation for illegal arrest
and detention is an area which is unearthed new doctrines pertaining to compensatory
10
11
12

AIR 1983 SC 1086

AIR 2000 SC 362
AIR 1986 SC 498

20

jurisprudence in India. In this case, the appellant was a member of the J&K. Legislature
Assembly who was arrested by the police in connivance with the local A.D.M. while on his way
to attend the assembly session. He was maliciously and deliberately arrested and detained in
police custody in order to prevent him from attending the assembly session. Allowing the
petition, Justice Chinnappa Reddy, speaking for the Apex Court observed that where a person has
been arrested and detained with a malicious and mischievous intent and his legal and
constitutional rights are invaded , the malice and the invasion is not washed away by his being
set free. The court has the jurisdiction to order compensation to the victim. The state was
therefore, directed to pay a compensation of 50,000/- to the petitioner for the violation of his
legal and constitutional right.
The question of award of compensation to a victim of rape came up for adjudication before the
Supreme Court in the historic Bodhisatava Gautam v. Subhra Chakarbortys13 Case. The
court in this case noted:
Rape is a crime not only against the person of a women, it is the crime against the entire society.
It destroys the entire psychology of a woman and pushes her into deep emotional crisis. It is,
therefore, a most dreaded crime. It is violative of the victims most cherished right, mainly right
to life, which includes right to live with human dignity as contained in Art.21 of the
constitution.
The court ordered that the accused shall pay an interim compensation of Rs. 1000/- per month to
the victim (women) of his crime (i.e. rape) during the entire period of trial proceedings. The
court further ruled that compensation to victim under such conditions will be justified even
when the accused was not convicted.
In state of Maharashtra v. Christian Community Welfare Council of India 14, the Supreme
Court was called upon to decide whether the compensation paid by the state to the victim can be
recovered from the guilty officer. Justice Hedge speaking for the court held that it will depend on
the fact of the case whether the alleged misdeed by the officer concerned was committed in the
course of the discharge of his official duties and whether it was beyond or in excess of his lawful
authority. If it was found that the appellate officers did cause the death of the deseased and
13
14

AIR 1996 SC 922

AIR 2004 SC 7 (para 10)

21

exceeded their lawful authority, then they cannot escape the liability to compensate the heirs of
the deceased victim.
In R. Gandhi v. Union of India15, the District Collector of Coimbator had recommended that the
state Government shall pay Rs.33,19,003/- as compensation to those families of Sikhs and others
living in Coimbator, who were victims of arson and rioting in the wake of the former Prime
Minister of India, Shri Rajeev Gandhi. The High Court of Madras upheld the order of the District
Collector. Justice S. A. Kadar of the Court observed:
Legally and morally by all canons of fair play, by all principles of justice, equity and good
conscience, the state of Tamil Nadu is bound to pay compensation to victims as assessed and
recommended by their senior officer i.e., the collector of Coimbatore.
In yet another landmark case on victims compensatory relief, namely, D.K. Basu v. State of
West Bengal16, inter alia made the following observation:
the monetary and pecuniary compensation is an appropriate and indeed an effective and
sometimes perhaps the only suitable remedy for the redressal of the established infringement of
the fundamental rights to life of a citizen by the public servants. The state is vicariously liable to
which the defence of Sovereign immunity is not available and the citizen must receive the
amount of compensation from the state; which shall have the right to be indemnified from the
wrongdoer.
The Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Chalia Ramakrishna Reddy 17, relying on
its earlier decision in D. K. Basu, awarded Rs. 1,44,000/- as compensation against the state
government for death of a person caused while he was in judicial custody. Rejecting the defence
plea that the prisoner was put in jail in exercise of States sovereign function, the court ruled that
the concept of sovereign power is not an exception to the right of right of freedom for life, and
constitutional guarantee of right to live overrides the theory of state immunity.
However, section 372 of Cr. P.C. as amended by the Cr. P.C (amendment act) 2008 now provides
that the victim need not approach the prosecution for its consent or approval to file an appeal
15
16
17

(2004) Cri.L.J 510 (Mad.)

AIR 1997 SC 610
AIR 2000 SC 2083

22

against the acquittal of the accused. This is indeed a welcome change in the procedural law
which now enables the victim to move in appeal against the acquittal order passed by the trial
court or against an order awarding the accused a lesser sentence or against an order convicting
the accused for a lesser offence or where the compensation awarded to him (that is victim) is
inadequate. It would thus be seen that the amendment of the code of criminal procedure in 2008
has undoubtedly made a beginning towards statutory protection of victims right under the
criminal justice system and now it is for the criminal law administrators to implement the law in
its true spirit.
Before concluding it must be stated that victimology and justice for victims of crimes is not
exclusively a legal problem it also has sociological, psychological, financial, and ethical
implications which needs to be addressed jointly by experts working in these fields adopting a
multidisciplinary approach. A community based Joint Victim impact Penal on the American
pattern may be constituted comprising lawyers, judges, sociologist , psychologist, women
activist, politicians, etc. to decide victims rights and claims and their rehabilitation in the
society.
The role of courts and judges is no less important in imposing sentences which have great impact
on social order and therefore public interest, especially those of victims, should not be lost right
off. Any liberal attitude by posing meager sentences without taking into considerations the woes
and sufferings of the victims and its impact on society shall be resultwise counterproductive in
the long run. The victimological researches for the past three decades have shown that care and
protection of victims right is an inseparable part of the sentencing though apparently it refers to
the accused who perpetrates the crime. The law and particularly, the criminal law as a corner
stone of the edifice of order in the society, should focus not only on the challenges confronting
the society but also the suffering of the victims of crimes who are faced with multiple problem
for years and, in some cases even for the whole of their life. It hardly needs to be stated that
crime one single act perpetrated by the offender but its implications on society in general and
victim(s) in particular are far more painful, torturous and disgusting which the criminal law
administrator must keep in the forefront while dispensing criminal Justice.

23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Victimology, Prof. N.V. Pranjape (2011),

2. Ahmed Siddique Criminology (2010),

24

3. Gaur K.D : poor victims of uses and abuses of criminal law and process in India,
published in 35 JILI (1993)
4. V.R.Krishna Iyer: Access to justice- A case of Basic Change (1991),
5. Justice for Victims, a handbook by Center for International Crime Prevention, New York
1999,
6. Rachel Mattison : Criminal Victimization the World Society of Victimology (2009),
7. Andrew Karman : Crime Victims : An introduction to Victimology (2003),
8. R. Deb Principles of Crimonolgy, Criminal law and investigation