-
by Admin
16 February 2026 4:21 AM
The Supreme Court in Case Titled Talat Sanavi Vs State of Jharkhand & Anr. Dated 24 Jan 2023 , while dealt with the issue of whether interim victim compensation can be imposed as a condition for grant of anticipatory bail, held that interim victim compensation cannot be imposed as a condition for granting anticipatory bail.
Supreme Court observed that the "victimology" movement in the 1960s led to the introduction of monetary compensation for victims of crime as an incentive for cooperation in criminal prosecutions. Canada and several states in the US started providing victim compensation, leading the way for victim justice initiatives in the criminal justice system. The UN Declaration on Basic Principles of Justice for Victims and Abuse of Power (1985) provided specific rights and entitlements for victims of crime, including the right to compensation
Supreme Court further observed that Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in India provides for the payment of compensation when a court imposes a fine or sentence, but with limitations on payment before the appeal period has elapsed or before the decision of the appeal. The compensation is for the person who has suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime committed. The appellate court or the High Court can also direct payment of compensation when exercising its power of revision.
Supreme Court quashed the condition imposed for interim victim compensation while granting anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal and held Victim compensation is determined at the same time as the final view of the alleged offense, i.e., after a verdict has been reached, and cannot be imposed before the matter is finalized. The impugned bail order suffered from an infraction of law as the question of interim victim compensation cannot form part of the bail jurisprudence, victim compensation is only determined after the conclusion of trial and cannot be imposed pre-trial.
TALAT SANVI VS STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.
