VICTIMS AND THE LAW : A SOCIO-LEGAL STUDY

SUMMARY

One nightfall, a man travelling on horseback

towards the sea reached an inn by the roadside. He

dismounted and confident in man and night like all

riders towards the sea, he tied his horse to a tree

beside the door and entered into the inn. At midnight

when all were asleep, a thief came and stole the

traveller's horse. In the morning the man awoke, and

discovered that his horse was stolen. And he grieved

for his horse was stolen and that a man had found it

in his heart to steal. Then his fellow lodgers came

and stood around him and began to talk. And the

first man said, "How foolish of you to tie your horse

outside the stable." And the second said, "Still more

foolish, without even hobbling the horse!" And the

third man said, "it is stupid at best to travel to sea on

horseback." And the fourth said, "Only the indolent

and slow of foot own horse." Then the traveller was

much astonished. At last he cried, "My friends,

because my horse was stolen you have hastened one

and all to tell me my faults and my shortcomings.

But strange, not one word of reproach have you

uttered about the man who stole my horse."

- Khalil Gibran.

The world is full of crime and criminals, tragedy and violence. Crime is a

social phenomenon. No society primitive or modern, no country whether under

developed or developing or developed is free from its clutches. The by-product of

2

the crime i.e. victim is equally bound to emerge. The focus has mainly and always

been on criminal and crime, none on victim. So, the forgotten man in the legal world

and society happens to be the "victim" for whose plight remedy we have the whole

system.

More than fifty years ago justice Benjamin N. Cardozo of the United States

Supreme Court wrote "justice, though due to accused, is due to accuser also. The

concept of fairness must not be strained till it is narrowed to a filament. We are to

keep the balance true." Even so crime victims have not been treated fairly.

Somewhere along the way the system began to serve lawyers, judges and accused,

treating the victim with institutionalized disinterest.

Intellectual and Government concern for victim of crime, however, are or

recent vintage. The victim of crime did not become a subject of criminological

research until after the end of Second World War. The pioneering work of Benjamin

Mendolson, Hans Von Hentig and Stephen Schafer has remedied this glaring defect

in the field of criminology and appropriately made criminology 'total' in this respect.

Thus, the study of the victim, the analysis of his relationship and interaction with the

criminal, his possible contribution to his own victimization and his responsibility for

crime prevention was taken up. Having traced beginning to 1940's, victimology

remained surprisingly on the periphery of the criminological research until recent

years. The attention which has been directed in recent years to that " 'poor relation'

of criminal law", has led to crystalization of professional and public opinion in

favour of alleviating the predicament of this forgotten figure of the contemporary

criminal justice system.

The present study seeks to examine various aspects of the victim's problems

and hurdles they face. The crime victims confront a host of obstacles in the way of

getting their legitimate due under the present system. This thesis is to depict various

facets of the victims ranging from their roles and typologies, historical perspective

to legislative and judicial attitude towards the idea of making victim as a whole. The

idea is to explore the victim's present position in various criminal justice and legal

system to future prospects for the victim.

3

The entire study here is organized in eight chapter. The introductory chapter

i.e. chapter one deals with the introduction of the victim, definition and outlining the

contours of victimology defines.

This chapter depicts the victim in light of various meanings, as given by

various writer, victimologist and along with it the gives a brief introduction to

victimology as a separate endeavour from criminology.

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, Lombroso, Ferri, Garofalo, Sutherland, Hentig, Nagel,

Ellenberger, Wolfgang and Schafer, the concept of a science to study victims and

the word "Victimology" had its origin with the early writings of Benjamin

Mendelsohn. Then, Prakash Talwar describes victimology as the independent study

of the relationships and interactions between offender and victim before, during and

after the crime. The big question here we need to know is who the victims are. The

main goal of victimology is always the person of the victim. The concept of victim

dates back to ancient cultures and civilizations such as Hebrews. Its original

meaning was rooted in the idea of a sacrifice or scape goat. Merriam Webster

dictionary defines victim as one that is acted upon and usually adversely affected by

a force agent. Oxford dictionary defines the victim as a person or thing injured or

destroyed in pursuit of an object, in gratification of a passion etc. or as a result of

event or circumstances. "Victim" has been defined under ICC (Inter-national

Criminal Court) statute as 'natural persons who have suffered harm as a result of the

commission of any crime within the jurisdiction of the ICC. It includes "legal

entities that have sustained direct harm to any of their property, which is dedicated

to religion, education, art or science or charitable purposes, and to their historic

monuments, hospitals and other places and objects for humanitarian purposes.

4

Just as certain persons are thought to have a high probability of indulging in

criminal behaviour, so also some others may have a greater likelihood of being

victimized. The part played by the victim in the origin of crime is the central

problem in victimology. This, in essence is the question of responsibility; who is

responsible for what and to what extent? Victim-offender relationship is one of the

most important notions in victimology. Mendelsohn calls the victim and his offender

the 'penal couple.' According to Von Hentig, the relationship between the victimizer

and the victim are very intricate. The victim, one who suffers and the victimizer, one

who harms, appear in victimization in a close interpersonal relationship and the

victim plays a determinant role with the victimizer. With a thorough knowledge of

the interrelations between doer and sufferer new approaches to the detection of

crime will be opened. The potentialities of crime prevention will experience a vast

expansion.

Thus, the second chapter deals with the role and typology of victims. Further

the typologies of victims or classes of victims as given by various writers and the

various theories of precipitation are also mentioned. Von Hentig's original typology

of four types of victim was expanded into thirteen. Similarly Mendelssohn had six

categories ranging from 'complety innocent' to the 'most guilty victim.' Their

observation compiled with the new ones open new vistas to an offender - oriented

world.

The role, importance, and visibility of the victim have varied greatly in

human societies. These variations reflect the historical evolution of legal concepts,

as well as diverse approaches to the interpretation of such notions as that of

individual responsibility. At one time in history, the victim of crime enjoyed the

central position in the administration of the criminal justice. Over the centuries,

however, the victims have evolved as a mere witness in the criminal proceedings. In

third chapter we have attempted to trace the rise and fall of victim in the criminal

justice system.

"Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of

crimes and misfortunes."

- Voltaire

5

The traumatic experiences of the Second World War in Europe acted as a

catalytic agent for thinking minds in the criminological field to concentrate their

thought processes on this vital element for whose benefit, protection, and for whose

peaceful existence organized society established systems of criminal justice namely,

the victim. Till the end of Second World War there has been virtually no

consideration of the victim's participation in the wrong doing or victim's perception

of criminal justice system or compensation to the victim of crime by the criminal

law and criminologist. But historically the victim once enjoyed the golden age

during which his important role was recognised and also an emphasis was given for

due consideration to compensation recognizing his right to physical and economic

well being in terms of human dignity. As the modern state emerged and the

government took on itself the responsibility of enforcing justice, the offender

gradually became the central figure in the criminal arena.

The dominating role of the victim originated from the middle ages and this is

very evident from the system of "composition" (compensation). Though the victim

enjoyed a golden age in the middle ages, then also it must be admitted that the

restitution to the victim of crime is an ancient practice and which was inseparable

link with the system of punishment. In early times, compensation and restitution

were enforced for purposes of increasing the punitive sanctions against the criminal.

In those times, punishment was on the basis of revenge and cruelty and it was not

uncommon for a thief to have his hand cut off or for a rapist to be castrated.

The basis of primitive law was the reparation by the offender or offender's

family to the victim for his loss or injury. At the time, there was no political

institution to enforce law and punish the criminal, so the right to punish was vested

with the victim or victim's kin. By end of the Middle Ages, it was generally

reconized that the person harmed must have recourse through the common law,

rather than taking the law into his or her own hands. Unfortunately, because of the

state's interest in "bringing the wrongdoer to justice" and punishing criminal,

victim's needs for compensation were often postponed or completely ignored.

However, whilst the victim's right to compensation have diminished in the Middle

Ages, victims continued to play a vital role in the process of prosecution until the

6

mid-nineteenth century. By the beginning of the twentieth century, it can be seen

therefore the status of victim in the criminal justice process was minimal. They

played a role obviously in reporting crime to the police and there was minimal

legislative provision for compensation. The victim of crime occupying a position of

almost complete obscurity for centuries, has now emerged and has been accepted as

a person worthy of attention in nations across the world.

Thus, this 'rags to riches' story of victims and how their condition

deteriorated at one time and flowered at other time is the basis of the third chapter.

The fourth chapter is an attempt to describe the victims in the Criminal

Justice System. The victim of crime has been the 'forgotten man' of the criminal

justice system. This lack of knowledge about victims is astonishing; given that the

criminal justice system as we know it today would collapse if their cooperation was

not forthcoming. The chapter deals with the criminal justice in different times,

nations and legislations. The recent concern for the plight of the crime victim is

largely attributed to the writing of Margery Fry; a highly influential English penal

reformer in London proposed that victim should no longer be made to depend upon

civil suits for loss inflicted upon them by crimes. Her argument was that government

compensation to the victims of violence was a logical extension of an enlightened

social policy, which already provided transfer payments for the majority of social

dislocation occasioned by modern life in industrial society. The responsibility for

safety to the government when a citizen suffers the misfortune of victimisation by

the criminal act, the government failed to protect. The least the government ought to

do, when its protection fails to provide some type of insurance policy. It is unjust

and inequitable to make a small minority of unfortunate citizen to bear the cost.

Compensation and reparation is evident in early English law from about the

seventh century and among Germanic tribes. However, the development of a

centralized state in the Middle ages coincided with a diminution of the victim's right

to compensation and imposition of fines collected by the state. Nevertheless, the

development of criminal law and the distinction of criminal from civil law saw the

virtual exclusion of the victim from the criminal justice process. The victim became

the Cinderella of the criminal law. But in fairy tales, Cinderella did ultimately

7

become star of the ball and the fairy godmother eventually arrived. But, it is not the

as apart from feeling, ignored by the criminal justice system, v often feel they being

used by the courts. They are expected to report police but are not always made to

feel comfortable in doing this; for victims the police station remains a fairly

uninviting environment, called to give evidence, they are rarely permitted to relate

their experience their own words but are forced to answer questions, which may a

misrepresent their account of what occurred. Further more if they refer cooperate

they may be prosecuted because they would thereby be obstruct the course of

justice. The proceedings are indeed mostly adapted to the of the state, which has also

been victimized, in that; its peace and its have been broken. The state has an interest

in social control of offender therefore has a right to require any one to give evidence.

Despite plentiful and sufficiency of constitutional provisions, our criminal

justice system in India seems to impose a mindless permissiveness towards the

accused and the convicted criminal with the corollary of subordination to the rights

of the victims, and it appears that for all intents and purposes they are overlooked.

The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, in its provision under section 357 deals

mainly with the compensation to crime victims. Some other provisions also have

some bearing are Sections 237, 250 and 358 of the Code.

Various other legislations have been mentioned under which the rights are

provided to the victims like probation of Offender's Act and Workmen's

Compensation Act etc. Also the action taken by Judiciary and recommendations by

commissions and committees are mentioned too.

One realizes as a matter of fact, the place of victim in the criminal justice has

not always been the minimal one as it is today. The victim is a heavy loser in this

situation. Not only has he suffered, but lost material, become hurt physically or

otherwise. Not only does the state lack compensation but above all he has lost

participation in his own case. A criminal justice system, which ignores or ill treats

victims runs the risk of failure. Moreover, a massive lack of participation by the

people in the criminal justice system runs the risk of seriously damaging the present

constitutional ideals of criminal justice and permanently undermining the

government's crime control function.

8

The fifth chapter of the study examines the victims and their Human rights.

The transformation of the position of the individuals after the Second World War

has been one of the most remarkable developments in contemporary law. In addition

to the States, individuals are regarded as the real subjects and beneficiaries of law by

virtue of having rights and duties flowing directly from Law. While a few rules are

directly concerned with regulating the position and activities of individuals, a few

others, indirectly affect them. Thus, the right conferred by virtue of being human is

human rights. By implication, it denotes a kind of protection of humans from

humans. Protection from human means the act of human which is in no way

approved by other humans. It thus marginalized certain activities of individuals

which are unaccepted by the rest. Thus rights bestowed for immunity from those

unapproved activities to the humans are called human rights. If those activities are

analysed, we find them to be offending. In our civilized world those activities are

codified and made penal. And here the genesis of crime and victim emerged. We can

well utter that genesis of the human right is the crime and victim. Hence, broadly

these two terms victim and crime are co-related with human rights. The violation of

human rights is thus ought to create a victim.

Here, administrative of justice with respect to human rights in both

International and Indian Perspective is relevant. The U.N. declaration of Basic

Principles of Justice for victims of crime and abuse of power 1985 mentions various

protections, remedies and redressal provided to the victims. Similarly various rights

provided under the Indian constitution too are given.

The human rights jurisprudence in India has a constitutional state sweep so

that the Magna Carta may well toll the knell of human beyond civilized limits. The

human rights enshrined in Part III Constitution have been made non-degrogatable

under Article 13(2) an enforcement has been guaranteed under Article 32 of the

Constitution of the basic rights by approaching the Apex Court for relief.

Then, comes various classes of victims both at international and regional

level and what is done for their Human Rights, what protocols, treaties and

conventions are adopted for the purpose. The Judicial activism in India towards the

protection of Human rights is another aspect to be taken up.

9

A review of the decisions of the India judiciary regarding protection of

human rights indicates that the judiciary has been playing role of a saviour in

situations where the executive and legislature have to address the problems of the

people. The judiciary has come forward corrective measures and provide necessary

directions to the executive legislature. However, while taking note of the

contributions of judiciary one must not forget that the judicial pronouncements

cannot be a protective umbrella for inefficiency and laxity of the executive and

legislature. It is foremost duty of the State and all its organs to provide justice and

institutional and human errors affecting basic needs, dignity and life of human

being. Fortunately, India has a pro-active judiciary. It can aspired that in the times

ahead, people right to live with dignity, as human being, without being victimized,

will further be strengthened.

The extent to which human rights are respected and protected within the

context of judicial proceedings of a state is an important measure of its society's

civilisation. Another important aspect is to what extent the human rights of the

accused and victim be protected. Over emphasis on the protection of one interest is

bound to have an adverse impact on the other and therefore, an even balance has to

be struck between the two interests. The law and judiciary are entrusted to find the

dividing line so as to harmonise the two interests without causing detriment to any

one.

“Victims should come first”.

-Maria Julia Hernandez

Chapter six of the study deals with the remedies and safeguards provided to

the victims. How far reaching the effects of the said provisions are and how

beneficial have they proved till now are the prime concern of this chapter. It is of

course, an indisputable fact that victims of crime have long been a forgotten group, a

group that suffered for centuries not only from society's neglect but also from the

expropriation of their rightful dias by the state. It is also true that they had their

personal conflicts stolen by professional and by the criminal justice system.

However, the exceptional speed with which they were rediscovered and their cause

10

adopted by politicians, let alone the political climate that prevailed at the time of

their rediscovery, is bound to raise questions about the real interests and motives

behind what has been portrayed as a genuinely humanitarian and disinterest cause.

Despite rediscovering and emergence of victims in current decades, a close look at

the so called victim's initiatives and measures supposedly designed to help crime

victims and alleviate their plight reveals that the rhetorical cry of "justice for

victims" has been nothing more than an empty slogan. Measures introduced to assist

crime victims such as victim compensation, restitution, reparation, reconciliation,

victim impact statements and victim's right of allocution have been described as

political palliatives, political placebos and Band Aid measures. In an era meant to

become the golden age of the victim, there seems to be a growing obsession with

punishment, euphemistically called “Just deserts."

There are a number of ways crime victims can obtain reimburse for financial

losses associated with their victimisation. They can sue offender. They can sue a

third party, such as a landlord whose carelessness building security indirectly led to

their victimisation. They can file insurance claim or apply to the state crime victim

compensation fund. They can request that the court order their offender to pay

restitution. Or they enter into an agreement with their offender whereby the offender

voluntarily agrees to repay them. Restitution is an appropriate and effective criminal

sanction promotes the criminal law's goals of rehabilitation, deterrence and

retribution. It is however not an appropriate punishment for all crimes. Victim

compensation is another attempt to lighten some of the immediate costs of

victimisation suffered by some individuals. The Victim-offender reconciliation and

Victim-offender mediation programs incorporate face-to-face meeting of victim and

offender in the presence of a trained mediator. The primary goal of these programs

is to facilitate conflict resolution between the parties involved. The provisions

relating to victim's compensation in India is practically non-existent. But all the

same time, it also cannot be generalized that there are no compensatory measures

available at all. There are measures but more often than not official procedures are

cumbersome. Though the criminal justice system is elaborate and expensive, its aim

is almost entirely to protect the accused but not the accuser/victim. The provisions

11

relating to compensation to the victim of crime is contained in Section 357 of the

Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 and Section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act

1959 and some other statues. Looking into the needs of the victims, there were two

different programs evolved separately as Victim Services Programmes and Victim

Witness Assistance Programmes.

To date, the compensation orders and criminal injuries compensation provide

the major involvement of the state in helping victims of crime. Yet they touch only

the tip of ice berg they reach only a minority of victims and in no way adequately

address victim's problems. They provide inadequate financial solutions to some

victim's problems; in no sense; do they either promise or deliver justice. Thus, in the

long run, the interests of: crime victims and of society at large are best served by

humanity, empathy, compassion, tolerance, and forgiveness, by the development of

conciliatory and forgiving communities rather than hostile and vengeful ones.

Constructive healing should be the primary and foremost goal of both victim policy

and victim services.

Crime is one of the most important problems faced by our society and so is

the victimisation. Government in a democratic and welfare society, by its nature,

must serve and protect the individual from being victimized at one instance, and

importantly at the same time must look after the needs and requirements of the

victims. The plight of the victims today clearly depicts in capabilities of our legal

and criminal justice system. The legal and procedural provisions contained in our

statute book have been quite meagre in contrast to the large scale sufferings of the

victims as a result of crime every day. It is a matter of great disappointment that our

courts have not paid enough attention in the criminal cases to the distress of the

victims. An accused convicted is sentenced as of routine, while the victim and his

dependants get nothing.

Thus, chapter seventh deals with the victims in International scenario, how

different legal systems around the globe treat the victims and what measures are

embedded in their justice system to grant relief to them. A limited attempt has also

been made here to ascertain the position of victims under various Asian, European

12

and American legal systems and what is the impact of different international and

national victim movement around the globe.

Chapter eight deals with the predicaments, problems and suggestions with a

view to improve the condition of the victim and to make the criminal justice system

thereby more meaningful and much more fair and satisfying to the individual as well

as the society.

A few suggestions are as follows :

1. In India, "ignorance unlimited is the real cause for the individuals becoming

victims of the criminal justice system". Hence a mass campaign is necessary

to make aware of criminology, victimology, and about the advancements in

these fields of the judiciary. These elements are already enshrined in the

Article 38 and 41 of the Constitution of India, which direct the State to

promote the welfare of the people-by striving to secure a social order where

justice, social, economic and political shall prevail.

2. It is in the best interest of our country that it should embrace the trend where

victim becomes Cinderella of the criminal trial no longer accord with

tripartite notion of social justice viz. justice to the accused, society and the

victim.

3. It is suggested that for effective realization of compensation, restitution, and

reparation policy to victims of crimes government should invoke the

insurance sector, an arrangement which will relieve the government of the

need to cater for victims claim. For example, it is vague in case of accident

claims through Motor Accident Claim Tribunals and Insurance Company.

4. Compensation scheme conforms to the traditional concept of dispute

settlement and it is in consonance with the social value. It is also effective in

the speedy administration of criminal justice and is considerably less

expensive than civil process.

5. Victim compensation is an attempt to lighten some of immediate costs of

victimisation suffered by some individuals. It would, of course, do nothing to

reduce gross costs of victimisation. If victim compensation should become

perverted into a syndrome whereby the criminal is in effect subsidized by the

13

State than a terrible discussion will have been done to the safety of society. If

compensation is to be adopted, the criminal justice system must still bend

every effort to prevent crime from happening in the first place.

6. The present system of courts order of payment of compensation to the victim

by the accused requires order of conviction and sentence as a pre-condition.

The victim need to be compensated at the earliest. Since it is the obligation

of the State to protect the individual interests. State should be made to pay

immediate compensation to the victim without the burden of any additional

civil suit to be filed by the victim.

7. There is need in Welfare State, to evolve scheme of payment of

compensation by State in cases of crimes. Whether State should pay it

directly out of its exchequer, or through an insurable scheme as in Motor

Vehicles Accident Claims, or by creation of separate fund are the alternatives

available. In case a separate fund scheme is adopted, the power of operation

could be given to the judiciary as it is required to decide at the first instance

the existence of a prima facie case of loss or injury due to crime committed.

As regards the basis of compensation, the mode of computation as accepted

under the existing legislation such as Motor Vehicle Act, Workmen's

Compensation Act, etc. as well as yardsticks adopted by Civil Courts could

be effective guidelines.

8. A comprehensive Legal Code for victim compensation is a dire necessity.

The time has come for the legislature to stop shirking its duty. Hence, a

comprehensive Legal Code should be enacted providing for fair treatment,

assistance and adequate compensation to victims of crime. Only on

embarking on this step can justice in its more altruistic forms be obtained.

9. It should be made mandatory for the state to pay compensation to the victims

of crime of not only the private criminal wrongs but also for the criminal acts

perpetrated by its agencies. This mandatory duty of the state gains

importance from two points of view namely as a welfare state committed to

the constitutional goal of social justice and secondly for its failure to protect

the life, liberty and security of its citizens.

14

10. In India there is an urgent need to establish a "Compensation Board" and of

quick disposal of cases of victims of crime and lock-up deaths in police

custody. In case of delay in investigation on trial of the case, the victim

should be granted some compensation on the merit of the case and on final

disposal of the case an interim relief, the full settlement of compensation by

way of increase or reduction or recovery of compensation to the needy

victims. The compensation to the victim or his dependants should be granted

without delay taking into account the victim's age, occupation etc., so as to

substantially compensate the loss suffered by the victim and his dependants.

11. The criminal trial proceedings and victim compensation proceedings should

be integrated in one continuous process according to which all victims

should be compensated adequately and promptly for the injury and/or loss

which they sustain. The primary responsibility should be that of the State for

paying such Compensation.

12. The State should periodically review existing legislation and practices to

ensure their responsiveness to changing circumstances. It should enact and

enforce, if necessary legislation prescribing acts that constitute serious

abuses of political or economic power, as well as promoting policies and

mechanisms for the prevention of such acts, and should develop and make

readily available appropriate rights and remedies for victims of such acts.

13. The Malimath Committee appointed by Govt. of India in 2003 has really

made a commendable effort in studying the role and availability of respite to

the victims. The victims should be allowed to participate in the investigation

and give their inputs freely to the investigating agencies. Their perspective of

the offence and the offender will throw a better light on the whole issue.

Likewise, if the victims are allowed to espouse their cause/relief for

themselves one will be even taken aback by the simplicity of their approach

and the lightening quickness in which the whole case would get disposed off.

The concept of compensation is inextricably linked to the socio-

economic and legal norms prevailing in the society. Thus, the issue of

payment of compensation arises several queries which needs to be tackled

15

Victim Assistance programme should be initiated on a large scale by the

government to meet the victim needs and to deal with the threat of early

victimisation and a long-term response. It should also take the task of

educating victims about crime prevention.

14. Restitution focus primarily upon the argument that it has no penal character

and that to secure reinstatement to the victim is no more than the

enforcement of a civil liability. Restitution fails in short, to acknowledge the

distinction between civil and criminal law. It ignores the broad social

dimension of crime, that it is not only the victim but also society that has

been wronged. It may lack the deterrent or punitive impact necessary to

control crime.

15. Victim Assistance programme should be initiated on a large scale by the

government to meet the victims needs and the deal with the threat of early

victimization and a long term response. It should also take the task of

educating victims about crime prevention.

Nothing is more central to our well being than our primary personal right to

life, bodily security, freedom of movement, security of habitation and enjoyment of

property - rights whose protection we have committed to the charge of criminal law.

Yet the criminal law system remains far short of expectation in this area even long

after anniversary of the Indian Penal Code. The conservative economist, Milton

Friedman, one wrote that a basic and indispensable role for government in a free

society is to enforce compliance with the rules on the part of those few who would

otherwise not play the game. "My freedom to move my fist", he said "must be

limited by the proximity of your chin." That of course is not the most tremendously

sophisticated among all the roles which have been assigned for the government. It is

a rock-bottom, minimal role, the kind of role every body thinks is proper and

necessary for government to play. Where crime is concerned, however, not only

government has been unable to accomplish that rock-bottom, minimal function, that

is, to enforce compliance with the rules but Friedman's "few" have become legion,

they are increasing from quarter to quarter, and there seems many problems for

government in seeking the niceties of balance between the 'offender's fist' and the

16

'victim's chin'. As of now, consequently, it is the chins which have to avoid

proximity to the fists rather the other way about.

The system of criminal law is of highly absorbing interest and requires

unravelling of the myriad facts in which its effects are felt by the state, the society,

the criminal and last but not the least important, the victim himself. The context as

well as function of the normative rules from the perspective of the normative rules

from the perspective of the normative rules from the perspective of the victim quite

appropriately requires indepth study as well as appropriate state action in India.

Crime damage our social fabric, and every victim of crime suffers. As a

community, we respond by apprehending the perpetrator and punishing them for

their criminal acts. But the criminal justice system must do more than punishing the

criminal. It must seek to heal the wounds- emotional, physical and financial - caused

by crime. This is difficult but essential goal. Difficult because there are some losses

for which we cannot possibly make the victim whole again. Essential, because we

live in a society that is based on the principle of fairness and justice for all citizens.

If the government has not done any thing for the victims to date, it is largely because

efforts to reduce victimization have concentrated on reducing crime rate rather than

on helping victims because the public - either through ideological or psychological

motives or through a combination of both - has not only failed to pressure the

government, but has actually tended to blame the victim of violence nearly as much

as the criminal. It seems that we are on the verge of an important national discovery

of the victim, and that discovery, propelled by general guilt, calls for immediate

study of the problem and to take up necessary steps. But the fact is that we have just

begun to study the problem and there are no magic buttons to push for obtaining the

desired results and for that we have to take up necessary steps to improve the

position of the victim in the criminal justice system. So, there is a need for renewal

of emphasis and an enhanced sensitivity to the rights of the victim. These rights

should be the central concern of those who participate in the criminal justice system

and it is time all of us paid greater heed to the plight of the victim.

17

LIST OF CASES

A.K. Gopalan Vs. State of Madras A.I.R. 1950, SC 27.

ADM Jabalpur Vs. Shivakant Shukla A.I.R. 1996 SC 1207.

Amitaduaji Kumar Vs. State of West Bengal (2000), 9 SCC 404.

Anoop Singh Vs. Inder Singh & Ors. 1987 ACJ 84 (M.P.).

Arjunan Vs. State by Inspector of Police Madras HC (1997) Criminal Law Journal

2327.

Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs. Union of India : A.I.R. 1984 SC 802.

Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs. Union of India and others A.I.R. (1992) SC 38.

Bishambhar Gautam Vs. Subhra Chakaraborty (1996) 1 SCC 490 at 500.

Cabral Vs. State of Board of Control : 112 California Appeal, 3d 1012, 169

California Reporter, 604 (1980).

Chairman, Railway Board Vs. Chandrima Das (2000(1)) p. 280.

Christian Community Welfare Council of India Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra SCC

(1996).

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nirmala Devi 1980 ACJ 55 (SC).

D.K. Basu Vs. State of West Bengal A.I.R. (1997) 1 SCC 416.

Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum Vs. Union of India and others A.I.R.

(1995) 1 SCC 14.

Dhungana Vs. His Majesty's Government, Nepal Supreme Court Judgement dated

02 August, 1995.

Emeka Muojekwu Vs. Okechukwu Ejikeme, 2000(5) Nigerian WLR (Part 657) 402-

423.

Fertilizer Corporation Kamgar Union Sindri Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1981 SC 344.

Francis Coralie Mullin Vs. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi : A.I.R. 1981 SC

746.

G.M., Kerala State R.T.C., Thiruvanathpuram Vs. Susamma Thomas A.I.R. 1994(2)

SCC 176.

Gaurav Jain Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1990 SC 292.

Hari Kishan and State of Haryana Vs. Sukhbir Singh and Others A.I.R. 1988, SC

2127.

Hari Singh Vs. Sukhvir Singh (1998) 4 SCC 551.

Harkishan and State of Haryana Vs. Sukhbir Singh A.I.R. Criminal Law Journal 116

(SC)

Husain Vs. State of Kerala (2000), 8 SCC 139.

Hussainara Khatoon Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar A.I.R. 1977 SC 1360.

Hussainara Khatoon Vs. Stat of Bihar A.I.R. 1979 SC 1360.

Hussainara Khatoon Vs. State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 93.

Jolly George Verghese Vs. Bank of Cochin A.I.R. 1980 SC 470.

Keshvananda Bharti Vs. State of Kerala A.I.R. 1973 SC 1461.

Khatri Vs. State of Bihar A.I.R. 1981 SC 928, 1068.

Kiroloskar Bros Ltd. Vs. ESI Comp (1996), 2 SCC 682.

Kirthar Singh Vs. State of Punjab A.I.R. 1994, 3 SCC 565.

Labourers Working on Salal Hydro Project Vs. State of J & K A.I.R. 1984 SC 177.

18

Laxmi Kant Pande Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1984 SC 469.

Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1978, SCC 597.

Mena Jayendra Thakur Vs. Union of India (1999), 8 SCC 177.

Mohini Jain Vs. Union of India (1992) 3 SCC 666.

Moulvi Masood Ahmad Vs. State of J&K A.I.R. 1997 J&K 75.

Municipal Council, Ratlam Vs. Vardichand A.I.R. 1980 SC 1622.

Nag Singh Pal Vs. Union of India (2000), 3 SCC 588.

Nandini Satpathy Vs. P.L. Dani (1978) SCC 424.

Narmada Bachao Andolan Vs. Union of India A.I.R. (2000) 10 SCC 644.

National Human Rights Commission Vs. State of Arunanchal Pradesh and another

A.I.R. (1996) 1 SCC 742.

Neerja Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P. A.I.R. 1984 SC 1099.

Nilabati Behera Vs. State of Orissa A.I.R. 1993 SC 1960.

Olga Tellis Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation : A.I.R. 1986 SC 180.

P. Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of Karnataka (2000) 4 SCC 578.

P.P. Sah Vs. Bihar : A.I.R. (1977) SC 704.

Palaniapa Gounder Vs. State of Tamilnadu A.I.R. 1977, SC 1323.

Pamula Saraswathi Vs. State of AP (2003) 3 SCC 317.

Parmanand Katara Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1989 SC 2039.

PUCL Vs. Union of India (1997), 1 SCC 301.

Puran Vs. Rambilas (2001) 6 SCC 338.

R. Rathinam Vs. State (2000) 2 SCC 391.

Rajeshwari Prasad Vs. R.B. Gupta : A.I.R. 1961 (Pat. 19).

Rakesh Chandra Vs. State of Bihar A.I.R. 1989 SC 348.

Rudal Sah Vs. State of Bihar A.I.R. 1983 SC 1086.

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra Vs. State of U.P. A.I.R. 1987 SC 359.

S.A. Karim Vs. State of Karnataka : (2000) 8 SCC 710.

S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India A.I.R. 1982 SC 149.

Sanjit Roy Vs. State of Rajasthan A.I.R. 1983 SC 328.

Sarla Mudgal Vs. Union of India : A.I.R. 1995 SC 1531.

Sarwan Singh Vs. State of Punjab - SCC 111 (1978).

Sarwan Singh Vs. State of Punjab A.I.R. 1978 Criminal Law Journal 1598 (SC).

Satyabrat Jain Vs. State of Bihar (2000), 9 SCC 398.

Shankar Vs. Durgapur Project Ltd. A.I.R. 1988 Cal 136.

Sheela Barse Vs. Stae of Maharashtra A.I.R. 1983 SC 378.

Smt. Geeta and Another Vs. Lt. Governor and Others 75 Delhi Law Times 822

(1998).

Sri Lakshmi Agencies Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh : (1994) 1 Andh LT 341.

State of Gujrat Vs. Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat A.I.R. 1998 Criminal Law Journal

4561 (SC).

State of Punjab Vs. Ram Lubhay Bagga (1998) 4 SCC 117.

Sunil Batra Vs. Delhi Administration : 1978 (4) SCC.

Sunil Batra Vs. Delhi Administration A.I.R. 1980, SC 1579.

Undertrial Prisoners R.D. Upadhyay Vs. State of A.P. (2000), 10 SCC 255.

Union Public Service Commission Vs. S. Papiah (1997) 7 SCC 614.

Unni Krishnan Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh A.I.R. (1993) 1 SCC 645.

Valsamma Paul Vs. Cochin University (1996) 3 SCC 545.

19

Velasquez Rodriguez Vs. Honduras, Inter-American Court of Human Rights (29

July, 1988).

Vikram Deo Singh Vs. State of Bihar, A.I.R. 1988 SC 1782.

Vishakha Vs. State of Rajasthan A.I.R. (1997) 6 SCC 241.

20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF BOOKS

A. Karmen : Crime Victims : An Introduction to Victimology (1990).

A. Morris : Women, Crime and Criminal Justice, Oxford (1987).

Acharya Vishnugupta : Arthsastra (Chanakya).

Ahmed Siddique : Criminology.

Albert R. Robert : "Helping Crime Victims", Sage Publication, 1990.

Arjun Dev, Indira Arjun Dev and Gupta Das : Human Rights : A Source Book,

NCERT, New Delhi, 1996.

B.B. Das : Victims in the Criminal Justice System, (APH Publishing Corporation),

1997.

Burt Gallway & Joe Hudson : Perspective on Crime Victims, 1981.

C.R. Cooper : Here's to Crime (1937).

Chilperic Edwards : The Hammurabi Code, Kennikat Press, New York, 1971.

Devasia V.V. : The Phenomenon of Murder, Duttasons, Nagpur (1989).

Dr. Priyanath Sen : "General Principle of Hindu Jurisprudence".

Durga Das Basu : Constitution of India.

E.A. Fattah : Restorative and Retributive Justice Models : A Comparison (1995).

E.B. Tyler : Anthropology, New York (1989).

Edward A. Ziegenhagen : Victims, Crimes and Social Control, Praeger, New York

(1977).

Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey : Principles of Criminology (1966).

Frederic Pollock and Frederic William Maitland : The History of English Law,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1898).

Frederick Wertham : The Show of Violence, New York (1949).

G. Geis : Crime Victims : Practices and Prospects (1990).

H.E. Barnes and N.K. Teeters : New Horizons of Criminology, Prentice Hall,

Englowood Cliff, New Jersey (1944).

H.M. Seevai : Constitution of India.

H.O. Aggarwal : International Law and Human Rights, Central Law Publication

(2009).

Hans Von Hentig : Punishment, its origin, Purposes and Psychology, London

(1937).

Hans Von Hentig : The Criminal and his Victim Yale University Press, New Haven

(1948).

Hari Singh Gaur : Penal Law of India.

Henry S. Maine : "Ancient Law", Oxfort Library Press (1946).

Herbert Edelhertz and Gilbert Geis : Public Compensation to Victims of Crime,

Praeger Publishers, New York (1974).

J. Austin : Lectures in Jurisprudence, R. Campbell, London (1945).

J. Pointing : Victims of Crime : A New Deal? Milton Keynes.

J.L. Barke : We Are All Victims, Peel Press, London (1978).

Jeremy Bentham : An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation

(1789).

21

Joana Shapland, Jon Willimore and Peter Duff : "Victim in Criminal Justice System"

Gower, London (1955).

K. Chandra : The Indian Jail : A Contemporary Document, Vikas, 1983.

L. Kelly : Surviving Sexual Violence, Oxford (1988).

M. Maguire and J. Pointing : 'Victims of Crime : A New Deal?' Milton Keynes

(1988).

M. Wolfgang : Patterns in Criminal Homicide, New York (1958).

M.J. Sethna : Society and the Criminal, M.N. Tripathi, Bombay (1952).

M.J. Sethna, Jurisprudence, Bombay (1969).

M.P. Jain : Constitution of India.

M.P. Tondon : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Margery Fry : "Justice for Victims", The Observer (London), 1957.

Margery Fry : Arms of Law, London (1951).

Margery Fry : The Observer (London), 1957.

Max Muller : The Laws of Manu in Sacred Books of East, Oxford University Press,

Oxford (1886).

Max Muller Brihaspati, Sacred Books of East, Vol. 33, Oxford University Press,

Oxford (1886).

Mile Maguire : Victim's Needs and Victim's Services, Victimology (1985).

P. Rock : Helping Victims Crime : The HomeOffice and the Rise of Victim Support

in England and Wales, Oxford (1990).

P.R. Wilson, J.W. Brown : Crime and the Community, University of Queens, Land

Press, 1973.

Paramjit S. Jaiswal and Nishtha Jaiswal : Human Rights and the Law, APH

Publishing House.

Prakash Talwar (Editor) : Victimology (Isha Books 2006).

R.E. Meiners : Victim Compensation, Lexington Books, Toronto, 1977.

R.I. Mawby and M. Gill : Crime Victims : Needs, Services and the Voluntary

Sector, London (1987) Tavistock.

Raffaele Garofalo : "Criminology, (1958).

Ratan Lal Dhiraj Lal : Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Ratan Lal Dhiraj Lal : Indian Penal Code.

Robert C. Davis : Victims of Crime.

Robert Elias : The Politics of Victimisation : Victims, Victimology and Human

Rights, New York : Oxford University Press, (1986).

Robert Elias : Victims Still : The Political Manipulation of Crime Victims, 1993.

S.N. Mishra : Labour Laws.

Sandra Walkate : Victimology.

Stephen Schafer : Introduction of Criminology, Reston Publishing Company,

Virginia (1976).

Stephen Schafer : The Victim and His Criminal, A Study in Functional

Responsibility, Random House, New York, (1968).

Sutherland E.H. : Principles of Criminology.

V.N. Rajan : Victimology in India, Allied Publishers, New Delhi (1981).

Varadachariar : Hindu Juris.

Vasudha Dhagamwar : Law, Power and Justice : The Protection of Personal Rights

in the Indian Penal Code (1992).

22

Vidya Bhushan : Prison Administration in India, S. Chand, Delhi (1970).

W. Buckley : Sociology and Modern System Theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood

Cliffs, (1967).

William Tallack : Reparation to the Injured; and the Rights of the Victims of Crime

of Compensation.

Wolfgang, Marvin E : "Victim Precipitated Criminal Homicide", Victimology,

(1974).

Wolfgang, Marvin E. : Patterns in Criminal Homicide. Philadelphia : University of

Pennsylvania Press (1958).

Z. Alder : Rape on Trial, (1987) London.

Z. Chafee : Documents of Fundamental Human Rights, Harvard, 1951.

ARTICLES

A.T. Harland : Monetary Remedies for Victims of Crime : Assessing the Role of the

Criminal Courts. (1982) University of California Los Angeles Law Review.

Adeniyi Olatubosun : "Compensation to Victims of Crime in Nigeria : A Critical

Assessment of Criminal Victims Relationship", Journal of Indian Law

Institute, Vol. 44, 2002.

Arjun Sengupta : "Human Right to Development", Journal of NHRC, Vol. 2, 2003.

Arthur J. Goldberg : "Preface" (Symposium on Victim Compensation), Southern

California Law Review, 43 (1970).

Boyd L. Wright : What about the Victims? Compensation for the Victims of Crime,

North Dakota Law Review, (1972).

Bruce J. Camechon : "Victims' Right Against Terrorism and the Administration of

Criminal Justice" Criminal Law Journal, 2002.

D. Miers : 'Positivist Victimology : A Critique', International Review of Victimology

(1989).

Ezzat A. Fattah : "The use of the Victims as an Agent of Self-Legitimisation :

Towards a Dynamic Explanation of Criminal Behaviour," Victimology : An

International Journal, Vol. I (1976).

Furqan Ahmad : "Protective Judiciary in Aid of Human Rights in India", Indian

Journal of International Law, Vol. 43, 2003.

G. Davies : Children on Trial? Psychology, Video-Technology and the Law,

Howard Journal, 30 (1991).

G.O.W. Mueller : Compensation for Victims of Crime : Thought Before Action,

Minnesota Law Review 50 (1965).

Issac Ehrlich : "The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment : A Question of Life and

Dealth", American Economic Review, 65 (1975).

J. Morgan and L. Zedner : The Victim's Charter : A new deal for child victims?

Howard Journal, 31 (1992).

James M. Buchanan : "The Samaritan's Dilemma", in Altruism Morality and

Economic Theory, Russell Sage Foundation, New York (1975).

23

Jerome Hall : "Interrelation of Criminal Law and Torts", Columbia Law Review,

Vol. 43, (1943).

John P.J. Dussich : Victimology - Past, Present and Future.

Justice Krishna Iyer, Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court of India in his writing "The

Criminal Process and Legal Aid", Published in Indian Journal of

Criminality.

K.I. Vibhute : "Victimology : an International Perspective", Cochin University Law

Review, Vol. 14 (1990).

Kumaraveloi Chockalingam : Measure for Crime Victims in Indian Criminal Justice

System.

L. Lamborn : The Impact of Victimology on the Criminal Law in the United States :

Canadian Community Law Journal (1986).

Marvin E. Wolfgang : "Social Responsibility for Violent Behaviour" Southern

California law Review, 43 (1970).

N. Christie : "Conflict as Property", British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 17 (1977).

Ofer Zur : Rethinking 'Don't Blame the Victim.'

P.N. Benerji : Compensation to the Victims of Criminal Evidence in India, The

Banaras Law Journal, Vol. 12 (1976).

S. Muralidhar : Rights of Victims in the Indian Criminal Justice System, Journal of

NHRC, Vol. 2, 2003.

S.G. Pradhan : Compensation for the Victims of Crimes of Violence, 5, Police

Science Congress, Sanford.

Smith, Susan J. : 'Victimisation in the Inner City'. British Journal of Criminology,

Vol. 22 (1982).

Sujata Manohar : "International Human Rights Law in Domestic Courts : Violence

Against Women and Administration of Justice". Journal of NHRC, Vol. 2,

2003.

COMMISSIONS AND DOCUMENTS

Arthshastra I & II.

Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power,

1985.

Encarta Encyclopedia, 2004.

Encyclopedia Britannica, 2004.

Final Report of the US President's Task Force on Victims of Crime (1982).

Guide for Practitioners Regarding the Implementation of the Declaration, 1990.

Law Commission of India, 1985.

Law Commission of India, 41st Report on the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1969.

Law Commission of India, 42nd

Report on Indian Penal Code, 1971.

Malimath Committee Report on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, 2003.

Manu Samhita.

Manusmriti : IX 272.

Narada Samhita.

24

NEWSPAPERS AND MAGAZINES

Crime Reporter

Dainik Bhaskar

India Today

Lawteller

The Hindu

The Indian Express

The Times of India