CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

The victims are a significant part in the criminal justice systems all around the
world and slowly reforms had been adopted to ensure that the victims get the justice
they deserve but, India still has a long way to go as the concept of victim rights are
often disregarded as the major focus is shifted to the accused rather than the victim.
According to the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and
Abuse of Power, the definition of Victim has been stated as “Victim” means persons
who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm, including physical or mental
injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their
fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws
operative within the Member States, including those laws proscribing criminal abuse
of power.Victims play a vital role in any proceeding in the court of law as it is their
rights that have been affected due to various reasons such as their fundamental
rights being breached, or due to any criminal mishap that occurred to them etc. Even
though this is the case, In India the scenario is different as more rights are given to
the accused and not to the victims as they do not have many remedies to seek
justice.
Victim justice is a method through which the victims can seek justice from the
court of law and ensure that their rights are protected and not be just witnesses to
the proceedings when they take place and they usually include the right to get
compensation, the right to be included when the proceedings are happening etc.
This method is very necessary too so that the victims get a platform to raise their
voice on the atrocities that have taken place to them and how it has affected them,
by doing this the offender also takes upon a sense of responsibility to the crimes that
have been committed by them.

SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE STUDY

The concept of victim justice is a neglected concept in India, but it is gradually being
recognised as it is very important to protect the rights of the victims and ensure that
they get justice and it has gradually broadened with time.Victim Justice aims to focus
on both critical leadership and practical development representing victimological
perspectives from a broad range of disciplines and contribute to a greater
understanding of victims, victimization, victim- offender relations, institutional
functioning and allied issues.

a) To enhance our understanding regarding victims and impact of crime on them.

b) To analyse the magnitude of the victim’s problem
c) To explain causes of victimization
d) To understand how victims can seek justice from the court of law and ensure
that their rights are protected.
RESEARCH PROBLEM

1. Whether the rights of victims in India is considered as the major component of

the criminal justice system?
2. Whether in India victims are deprived of their rights under the criminal justice
system and they are treated as mere witnesses for prosecuting and punishing
the offenders?
3. Whether Concept of victim justice is an aspiration for progressing society?

HYPOTHESIS

● Victim restitution is now an essential part of delivering justice to victims.Clarity

and accountability in every part of the criminal justice system are necessary
for the proper application of current law after concerted labour efforts.
● Victims who have suffered harm are just compensated for the damages that
they have suffered through civil law and the accused is held responsible for
such compensation.

REVIEW OF EXISTING LITERATURE

1.INGE VANFRAECHEM, ANTONY
PEMBERTON, FELIX MUKWIZA NDAHINDA , JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS(2015)

2.Dr.B.VIJAYA LAKSHMI, VICTIMILOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM (1st

Ed.2021)

3.DR.JAMES VADACKUMCHERY, POLICE, VICTIM AND VICTIM JUSTICE (2001)

4.P.MADHAVA SOMA SUNDARAM, K.JAISHANKAR & S.RAMDAS, CRIME

VICTIMS AND JUSTICE (1st Ed.2020)

5.G.S .BAJPAL,CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM RECONSIDERED: VICTIM AND

WITNESS PERSPECTIVES

6.ANDREW KARMEN, CRIME VICTIMS AN INTRODUCTION TO VICTIMILOGY

(10th Ed.2020)

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study currently is prepared basically through analytical method, studying the
existing literature. Secondary sources including articles and books of both Indian and
foreign authors and online data bases have been referred.

CHAPTERIZATION
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER II - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
CHAPTER III- CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA AND VICTIMS OF CRIME
CHAPTER IV - CASE LAWS - TOWARDS VICTIM JUSTICE
CHAPTER V - RIGHTS OF VICTIMS OF CRIMES
CHAPTER VI - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
CHAPTER VII - CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS

CHAPTER-2

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Crime has a significant impact on a lot of victims. People who experience harm,
whether it be physical, social, or financial, should have access to justice. The impact
of crime on victims has recently taken focus away from criminal law jurisdiction, and
it has been concluded that victims should be treated empathetically and that their
fundamental rights must be upheld. Todays victim-logy is a new area of criminology
that focuses on understanding the viewpoint of victims.
The protection of crime victims is a significant source of concern because
conditions are not getting any better globally. Simple compensation aims to make up
for what would otherwise be considered unlawful injuries to people or their property.
It has been mentioned in accordance with several sections of the Motor Vehicle Act
of 1988, The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, and the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The rights of victims were one of the most important topics since time immemorial
since it was very much necessary and steps were taken to ensure that their rights
were protected.

A notable development in the history of Victim Justice and their rights was when the
Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for the Victims of Crime and Abuse of
Power, 1985 which was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations
which focused on the rights of the victims as well as how they can enforce these
rights and it recognised methods to secure the rights of the victims such as the victim
should have access to a free trial, should get compensation for the damages
suffered, they should get any sort of assistance they need with regard to the
procedures in the case, restitution was identified as one of the parameters to secure
the rights of the victims.
The first time that the concept of “Victim Justice” was talked about which changed
the face of victim rights as a whole in the United States was in the case of Linda R.S
v. Richard D,410 U.S. 614 (1972). this case was based on the issue where there was
a discriminatory application of Article 602 of the Texas Penal Code (amended later)
and it was held by the court that the mother does have interest in her child but only
when the father imprisoned or detained and that a private citizen does not have a
judicial interest as they have no control over the same. This judgement is a clear
example as to how victims were neglected but it also suggested a way in which
victim’s rights could be protected which was by making laws on the same and by
implementing them. This case is considered to be a landmark judgement after which
the period of Modern Crime Victim’s Rights Movement began.

In the year 2006, another declaration was adopted which focused on the Victim
Rights and how to secure these rights in a better method and for that Basic
Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of
Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of
International Humanitarian Law was enacted.

Victim Justice in India

India never adopted the Declaration of the Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of
Crime and Abuse of Power,1985 which is why the concept of victim rights is such a
bleak concept for the Indian judicial administration.
In foreign countries, protection, assistance and compensation is given to victims of
crime. However, in India, victims are mostly ignored in the criminal justice process.
Indian laws need to be more Victim-oriented which includes greater respect for
victims and their rights in the investigative and prosecution process. Also, provisions
for greater choices to victims during trial of the accused, and a system of reparation
or compensation especially for victims of violent crimes should be provided.

Inspite of presence of sections for rights to victims in Indian Constitution and Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the criminal courts pretend to be ignorant of them. It
was observed in Best Bakery's case that the rights and interests of victims can be
included and established in Indian Legal System.
According to the Indian legal framework, the term victim is defined under Section
2(wa) of the CrPC, 1973 as 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
the expression victim includes his or her guardian or legal heir. Although, this
definition suffers from obvious insufficiencies.

CHAPTER-3

PROVISIONS FOR VICTIMS IN INDIAN CRIMINAL LAWS

1. Constitutional Law of India

Our Constitution of India is considered to be the supreme law of the land and the
mother of all existing laws. The Indian Constitution includes some provisions for
victim's rights, their protection, and respects the idea of victim compensation. Article
14 and Article 21 inculcates some vital fundamental rights that are to be read with
Directive Principles of State Polices mentioned in Articles 39A, 41, 46, and 51C.
 As per Article 39A the state offers free legal assistance and guarantee for
promoting justice on the grounds of equal opportunity. Article 41 of the Indian
Constitution is relevant to the concept of victimology in a very broad manner as it
commands inter alia so that the state might start making provision to secure public
support in cases of incapacitation and also in cases of unjustifiable want.� If one
empathetically interprets and imagines creatively one can discover the early stages
of constitutional victimology. Moreover, Article 21 assures against unfair deprivation
of life and liberty by compelling the state to compensate victims of criminal violence.
In our Indian criminal justice system, a victim suffers everyday as the crime is
committed against him/her and also because he/she has to undergo a lot of
manipulation of the existing system. Whereas, the person who is found guilty is
sheltered, nursed, lighted, and entertained in prison for which the state gives the
expenditure from the taxes that the victims of crime are not provided with.

Justice V. R Krishna Iyer in Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab correctly said that:It is a
weakness of our jurisprudence that victim of crime and the distress of the
dependents of the victim do not attract the attention of law. However, the
reimbursement for victims is still the disappearing opinion of our criminal law. This
shows the deficiency in our system, which must be rectified by the legislature.

2.Rights Under Indian Penal Code

The Indian Penal Code is applicable to all Indian citizens who commit crimes
within the Indian Territory. It is a list of offences and its punishment. The Code
describes offence as an act or omission punishable by law. One of the major
advantage to victims protection was received by the Criminal Law Amendment Act,
2013 since, for the first time, it had introduced a number of new crimes for protection
of women against acid attacks (Sec. 326A20 and 326B21), sexual harassment (Sec.
345A), voyeurism (Sec. 345C) and stalking (Sec. 345D) and it also widened the
scope of definition of rape (Sec. 375) in IPC.

The two significant remedies of criminal justice system are compensation and
restitution which now, have become civil remedies during the modern period. This
invited the attention of various jurists to analyze the problems of victims from a
different perspective to improve their position and bring them on equivalence with the
accused.

3.Rights under Code Of Criminal Procedure

Indian criminal law in a broad sense includes both the substantive criminal law
and the procedural criminal law. Here, the Substantive criminal law describes
offences and punishments for each of those offences, whereas the procedural
criminal law manages the substantive law. In any circumstance where the procedural
criminal law is absent, the substantive criminal law would be considered as almost
worthless.
 The basis of the process that consists plea bargaining are found in Section 206(1)
and 206(3) of the CrPC. Plea Bargaining as a concept was introduced by The Law
Commission of India in its 142nd, 154th and 177th reports. In these reports, the
Committee advocated that the concept of plea-bargaining should be introduced into
the Indian criminal justice system to enable the past resolution of criminal cases and
lessen the burden on the courts.

The victim is represented by the Public Prosecutor who is appointed by the state. A
proviso has been added to Section 24(8) which allows the victim to choose an
advocate of his choice for assisting the public prosecutor according to the
amendment of 2008.
However the Code identifies few rights that favor the victims but they are not as
operative as those of rights of accused. For example, the code grants a right to
victim to choose his own private lawyer but the authority given to that lawyer is
limited to appoint where he can only submit the written arguments after the evidence
is recorded and only after the court permits.
(I). Rights Of Victims During Filing
Fir:
The police, being the primary authority plays an important since they are the first
authority to examine the case from a victim's perspective. Regrettably, in India the
victims are still provided with the treatment as mentioned in the United Nation
Handbook on Justice for Victims. The police, despite of being the primary authority to
investigate into the case, are totally unaware of the international developments in
areas such as victimology and well treatment that should be given to the victims.

Negative and ill treatment by police themselves will form a wrong perception of
Indian criminal justice system in the eyes of victims because as stated by United
Nation Declaration, treatment with compassion and respect for their dignity is no
doubt found missing at this stage. Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, No
confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of
any offence, is not taken seriously and the government and the police department
end up following the policy of sanitizing the police to a better treatment of victims.

(II)Rights Of Victims During

Judgement:
In a criminal case, after the judgment is pronounced, the victim's role in that case
ceases to exist. But the victim should be offered with some rights after the judgement
in order to ensure complete justice.

(III) Compensation to victim:

While pronouncing the judgement, the victim should be given the right to get
compensation. According to section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the
court has the right to grant compensation for any loss or injury suffered by the victim,
even in cases where fine was not levied upon on the accused.
 The Supreme Court of India in Harikishan & State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh
observed that courts in India rarely make use of section 357 of CrPC to grant
compensation to victims of crime. Keeping in mind the recommendations given by
the Malimath Committee and the Law Commission, the legislature inserted a
provision in section 372 of the Code through the Amendment Act of 2008 to provide
victims their right of appeal.
In addition to the existing provisions under the Indian criminal laws, a considerable
importance was given in the Report of the Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice
System, headed by Justice V. S. Malimath on the need to provide “justice to victims
of crime”.

CHAPTER-4

COMMITTEE ON REFORMS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs by its order dated 24

November 2000 constituted the Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System
to consider measures for revamping the criminal justice system. One of the
objectives of the committee was “to suggest ways and means of developing synergy
among the judiciary, the prosecution and the police to restore the confi dence of the
common man in the criminal justice system by protecting the innocent and the victim
and by punishing unsparingly the guilty and the criminal”. While referring to the
position of victims in the criminal justice system in India today, the committee
observed “that victims do not get at present the legal rights and protection they
deserve to play their just role in criminal proceedings which tend to result in
disinterestedness in the proceedings and consequent distortions in the criminal
justice administration” (Government of India, 2003: 75). With this general observation
the committee reviewed the position of victims under the criminal justice system,
including the present role that the victim is assigned under the existing criminal law;
provisions for compensation of victims of crime and so on. The report has also
highlighted how the Supreme Court and the High Courts in India have evolved the
practice of awarding compensatory remedies not only in terms of money but also in
terms of other appropriate reliefs and remedies. The report stated “medical justice to
the Bhagalpur blinded victims, rehabilitative justice to the communal violence victims
and compensatory justice to the Union Carbide victims are examples of the liberal
package of reliefs and remedies forged by the apex court. The decisions in Nilabati
Behera v. State of Orissa (1993 2 SCC 746) and in Chairman, Railway Board v.
Chandrima Das(2000 Cr LJ 1473 SC, cited in Government of India, 2003: 81) are
illustrative of this new trend of using constitutional jurisdiction to do justice to the
victims of crime. Substantial monetary compensations have been awarded against
the instrumentalities of the state for the failure to protect the rights of the victims”.
The committee also examined the rights of the victims of crime in diff erent criminal
justice systems worldwide. The committee was impressed with the report on
“Criminal Justice: The Way Ahead” presented to the British Parliament in February
2001, as the report proposed various amendments and recommendations.
The Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System was of the opinion that the
strategies being introduced in the United Kingdom for reforming the criminal justice
system to give a better deal for victims should be considered for adoption in India.
Taking into account the UK Report of 2001,the Committee made the following
recommendations:

1. The victim, and if he/she is dead, his legal representative shall have the right to be
impleaded as a party in every criminal proceeding where the charge is punishable
with 7 years imprisonment or more.
2. In select cases notifi ed by the appropriate government, with the permission of the
court an approved voluntary organization shall also have the right to implead in the
court proceedings.
3. The victim has a right to be represented by an advocate of his/her choice;
provided that an advocate shall be provided at the cost of the State if the victim is not
in a position to afford a lawyer.
4. The victim shall have the right to participate in criminal trial.
5. The victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any adverse order passed
by the court acquitting the accused, convicting for a lesser off ence, imposing
inadequate sentence, or granting inadequate compensation. Such appeal shall lie to
the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such
court.
6. Legal services to victims in select crimes may be extended to include psychiatric
and medical help, interim compensation and protection against secondary
victimization.
7. Victim compensation is a state obligation in all serious crimes, whether the
offender is apprehended or not, convicted or acquitted. This is to be organized in a
separate legislation by the Parliament. The draft bill on the subject submitted to the
Government in 1996 by the Indian Society of Victimology provides a tentative
framework for consideration.
8. The victim compensation law will provide for the creation of a victim compensation
fund to be administered possibly by the Legal Services Authority. The law should
provide for the scale of compensation in different offences for the guidance of the
Court.
It may specify off ences in which compensation may not be granted and conditions
under which it may be awarded or withdrawn.

The above analysis of the provisions in the Constitutional Law of India, criminal
laws and the recommendations of the Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice
System has provided the current status of victims of crime in India. In this context it
is also important to discuss some of the judgments wherein the principle of restitution
to victims of crime has been introduced or were upheld by the courts in India. But in
all these cases discussed below the word “compensation” has been used to refer to
“restitution” which is the accepted terminology by the international scholars for
payment made by off enders to victims of crime. As observed by Chockalingam
(1993: 74), the Indian courts use the term “compensation” to refer to restitution as
well as the real compensation, wherein the money is paid to the victim by the state or
other agency for abuse of power.

CHAPTER-5
CASE LAWS TOWARDS VICTIM JUSTICE

1.Palaniappa Gounder v. State of Tamil Nadu ((AIR 1977 SC 1323)

The first landmark judgment where compensation to the victim ordered by the
Madras High Court and upheld with some modifications by the Apex Court of India
was Palaniappa Gounder v. State of Tamil Nadu,[xii] where the Apex Court
observed,

“The first concern of the court, after recording an order of conviction, ought to
determine the proper sentence to pass. The sentence must be proportionate to the
nature of the offence and sentence including the sentence of fine must not be unduly
excessive.”

In fact, the primary object of imposing a fine is not to ensure that the offender will
undergo the sentence in default of payment of fine but to see that the fine is realized,
which can happen only when the fine is not unduly excessive having regard to all the
circumstances of the case, including the means of the offender.

2.Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab

(AIR 1978 SC 1525)

In the case of Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab,[xiii] the Supreme Court not only
reiterated its previous standpoint but also laid down, in an exhaustive manner, points
to be taken into account while imposing fine or compensation.The Court observed
that while awarding compensation,the Court must decide whether the case is fit
enough for compensation.If the case is found fit for compensation,then the capacity
of the accused to pay the fixed amount has to be determined.

3.Guruswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu

In Guruswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu(1979 Cr LJ 704), the accused was convicted

on a charge of murder. The victims were his father and brother. While reducing the
sentences, the Supreme Court held that the off ence was committed during a family
quarrel and though the victims are the father and brother of the appellant, in the
circumstances of the case, the extreme penalty was not called for. The accused had
also been under sentence of death for a period of six years. But in reducing the
death sentence to imprisonment for life, it was held that the widow and her minor
children should be compensated for the loss they have suffered by the death of the
second deceased. The court imposed a fi ne of Rs.10,000 to the appellant and
ordered the same to be paid as compensation to the dependents of the victim.

4.Hari Krishnan and the State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh

The case of Hari Krishnan and the State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh and others
(AIR 1988 SC 2127) is the most important case after Sarwan Singh where the court
repeated its fi rm understanding once again in the following words:
The power under Section 357 Criminal Procedure Code is a measure of responding
appropriately to crime as well as reconciling the victim with the off ender. It is, to
some extent, a recompensatory measure to rehabilitate to an extent the beleaguered
victims of the crime, a modern constructive approach to crime, a step forward in our
criminal justice system.The payment by way of compensation must, however, be
reasonable. What is reasonable may depend upon the facts and circumstances of
each case.

5.Rachhpal Singh v. State of Punjab

The case of Rachhpal Singh v. State of Punjab (2002 Cr LJ 3540 SC) occurred
due to a civil dispute pending between the deceased and the appellant. The
deceased obtained an interim order pertaining to the civil dispute.The complainant
separately preferred a Criminal Revision Petition praying for compensation under
Section 357 CrPC. Considering the revision petition, the High Court held that it was a
fit case for exercising the jurisdiction under Section 357 CrPC and directed each of
the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 2, 00,000, totalling Rs. 4, 00,000 and in default, to
undergo a sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment. However, referring to the
capacity of the accused, the Apex Court reduced the amount to half.

6. Mangilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh

The Supreme Court in Mangilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 2004 SC 1280)
held that the power of the court to award compensation to the victims under Section
357 is not ancillary to other sentences but in addition thereto. The basic difference
between subsection (1) and (3) of the Section 357 is that in the former case, the
imposition of fine is the basic and essential requirement, while in the latter even the
absence thereof empowers the court to direct payment of compensation. Such
power is available to be exercised by an appellate court, the High Court or the Court
of Sessions when exercising revisional powers.

7. Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharastra

In conclusion, the dismal judicial attitude has been cured by Apex Court in the case
of Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of (2013) 6 SCC, where it was laid down that if
the court fails to make a compensation order, it must furnish reasons. Where
reasons are given, the victim may apply for these to be subject to judicial review.
This case was an eye opener in victim jurisprudence and an essential insertion in
progressive interpretation. The Apex Court through its various decisions has
emphasised the granting of compensation, and has started realizing the necessity of
ameliorating the plight of the victim to the extent possible by restitution.

CHAPTER -6

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

In 1985, virtually simultaneously two powerful documents were issued urging the
international community to enhance the status of victims. The first one was the
United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and
Abuse of Power. The second one was the Council of Europe Recommendation on
the Position of the Victim in the Framework of Criminal Law and Procedure which
was also adopted in 1985. Although differences in language and in details cannot be
overlooked, the content of the Declaration and the Recommendation were to a large
extent overlapping and had subsequently been echoed and expanded on in other
international documents of a similar nature, such as the Statement of Victims’ Rights
in the Process of Criminal Justice, issued by the European Forum for Victim Services
in 1996, and the European Union Framework Decision on the Standing of Victims in
Criminal Proceedings. The most recent and most comprehensive example is the
Council of Europe Recommendations (2006)8 on assistance to crime victims,
adopted on 14 June 2006 (Groenhuijsen and Letschert, 2006:2-3).
The Basic Principles included in the UN Declaration for Victims are:
1. Access to justice and fair treatment;
2. Restitution;
3. Compensation; and
4. Assistance.
With regard to the restitution and compensation in the above Declaration, it is
stated that offenders should make a fair restitution to victims or their families;
restitution should be part of the sentencing in criminal cases; and when
compensation is not fully available from the off ender, the state should provide
monetary compensation to victims who suff ered serious physical or mental injury for
which a national fund should be set up (United Nations, 1985).
Some of the important recommendations of the Council of Europe
Recommendations (2006)8 on the assistance to victims and prevention of
victimization include the following elements: assistance, role of the public services,
victim support services, information, rights to eff ective access to other remedies,
state compensation, insurance, protection, mediation, raising public awareness of
the eff ects of crime and so on. It has also recommended for provision of restitution
and compensation to victims of crime. It recommends provision of compensation by
the state for victims of serious, intentional, violent crimes, including sexual violence.
It further states that the state compensation should be awarded to the extent that the
damage is not covered by other sources such as the offender, insurance or
state-funded health and social provisions (Groenhuijsen and Letschert, 2006:
170-171).
It is also important to learn from the experiences of the United States in providing
justice to victims of crime. Without the report of the victims or witnesses, most crimes
would not come to the attention of the police. Without the cooperation of the victim or
witness in identifying the offender, most crimes could not be solved, and the off
ender could not be brought to justice. In the United States, during the late 1960s, the
Federal Government launched a series of surveys designed to estimate the number
of crime victims. This research showed that, while arrest rates are high, many victims
failed to report crimes. Other studies noted that once an arrest had been made,
many victims failed to co-operate in the prosecution of offenders. Victims cited poor
treatment by the criminal justice system—long waits for trials, confusing instructions
and inadequate child care and portation resources as the reasons for their
reluctance to co-operate. The victim assistance movement began shortly thereafter
to respond to these needs. In the United States, spurred by research on victims’
needs, grassroot activism, substantial legislation and victim assistance programs
now number more than 10,000. Further, victim/witness programs in the United States
became a major feature of victimological development more than three decades ago
(Lynch, 1976; Bolin, 1980; Dussich, 1981; Schneider and Schneider, 1981; Mawby
and Gill, 1987; Young, 1990). Furthermore, the statutory approach is typifi ed by the
United States, where almost all states and the federal government have adopted
statutory guidelines on how the police and other officials in the criminal justice
system should deal with victims of crime.

CHAPTER-7

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

The victims are still struggling to get the justice that they deserve as there are not
many laws which can help them seek justice compared to the laws which are present
with the accused.

Though there are many changes that took place with regard to laws in India on
victim justice, it is just the start and there are miles to achieve in terms of ensuring
that justice is provided to the victims as well and to make sure that their rights are
not neglected as before because they play a very important role as all of the victims
are affected differently because of the reason that, there are different types of crimes
happening, so it is all the more necessary that the rights and concerns of these
victims are protected and looked into respectively to ensure fair justice to all.

This is the need of the hour and the necessary steps should be taken so that it is a
step forward to ensure victim justice and then only, will the society progress when all
the elements of the society are included and their rights are safeguarded.
 The analysis of the existing legal provisions in India for providing justice to victims
of crime shows that there is a long way to go. The experiences at the international
level, including the experience of the United States show that there is a lot needs to
be done at the macro level. But at the micro level certain immediate and possible
measures may be taken to help the victims of crime in India. Therefore, the fi rst
priority in the whole scheme of things is an all round sensitization of everyone
concerned. The natural sequence of rendering meaningful justice, social and legal
should proceed as follows:
1. Fair, considerate and sympathetic treatment by the police, hospitals, welfare
organizations, prosecution and courts;
2. Prompt restitution/compensation to the victim for the injury or loss suff ered by
using the existing provisions; and
3. Security to victims and potential victims against victimization in future.
The various assistance and services to victims during crime investigation include the
following:
1. The first step in assisting the crime victim is
a. to facilitate their access to services that already exists ; and
b. to get redressed from the impact of
crime
This is partly a question of getting information from the victims, partly encouraging
the victims to apply for services and partly sensitizing the service to the victim’s
needs.
2. The police could improve their support for crime victims by ensuring the
responding officer to provide the victim with a card that identifies key telephone
numbers of organisations available in the community.
The card should also contain:
a. the file number (crime number) of the case;
b. the name of the offi cer investigating the case; and
c. the phone number to contact regarding enquires about the progress of the case.
3. A victims support unit should be located in the police department, preferably at the
sub-divisional level to co-ordinate matters relating to crime victims.
If the above stated steps are implemented by the law enforcement agencies in India,
the position of victims in the criminal justice system will be improved substantially.