The document discusses the concept of compensatory jurisprudence, highlighting its historical significance and current practices in various legal systems, particularly in India. It outlines how victims of crime can seek compensation through civil courts and references notable legal cases that underscore the need for victim restitution. The document concludes by stressing the importance of compensation as a fundamental aspect of justice for victims, advocating for a more liberal approach in awarding damages while exercising caution against excessive compensation.

1. Name- Shravani Sadashiv Naik
Class – NLC 4th
Roll No – 5414
Topic Name – Compensatory in jurisprudence
Subject Name – Jurisprudence
Teacher Name – Dr. Mahendra Khairnar Sir

2. Introduction –
• Crime is seen as cancer of society which is steadily increasing. It
has been observed that the administration of criminal justice
remained generally unsatisfactory from the point of view of the
victims of crime. The basic object of the criminal Justice is to
protect the society against crime and to punish the offenders.
However, criminal Justice system does not show equal concern to
the victims of crime, who have suffered loss or injury.

3. History of compensatory Jurisprudence
• In the evolution of criminal jurisprudence, the concept of
compensation of the victim of the wrong occupied a major place
in most legal system. The principles to compensation for victims
of crime occupied a prominent place in mosaic law and the penal
codes of ancient Greece and Rome. The Roman specified
progressive rise in compensation payable depending upon the
stage of nature of the crime. Apart from theft, assault, libel and
trespass were other offences in which compensation was payable.

4. Compensatory Jurisprudence in India -
• Compensation to victims is a recognized principle of law being
enforced through the ordinary civil courts. Under the law of torts
the victims can claim compensation for the injury to the person or
property suffered by them. It is taking decades for the victims to
get a decree for damages or compensation through civil courts,
which is resulting in so much hardship to them.

5. Compensatory in Constitution
• Compensation for violation of Art. 21 –
• Chiranjit kaur V. Union of India
• An army officers died in service due to negligence of army
officers resulting in great mental agony and physical and
financial harship to the widow of the deceased and two minor
children. The court awarded the widow of the deceased a
compensation of Rs. 6 lakhs as well as special family pension
and children Allowance.

6. • Compensation to person killed in “fake Encounter “-
People’s union for civil Liberties V. Union of India –
• The petitioner, people union for civil Liberties, filed a writ petition under
art 32 of the constitution for issuing appropriate direction for instituting
a judicial inquiry into the fake encounter by Imphal police in which two
persons were killed, to direct appropriate action to be taken against the
erring official and to award compensation to the members of the family
of deceased. The police authorities denied the allegation of “fake
encounter “. The supreme court held that killing of two person in fake
encounter by the police was clear violation of the right to life guaranteed
in Art. 21 of the constitution and the defence of sovereign immunity
does not apply in such case. The court was awarded Rs.100000 as
compensation for each deceased.

7. • Compensation and Women Victims –
• Mukumda Martand Chatnis V. Madhuri
• For mud slinging and character assassination of the wife, husband was find
Rs.1 lakh and Rs 36000 was to be paid as compensation to the victim women.
• Compensation for medical negligence –
• Noval V. Union of India,
• The petitioner gave birth to a child despite sterilisation operation. It was
prima focie negligence on the part of the doctor. The petitioner was entitled
to compensation. Merely because consent was given by the petitioner due to
her weak position both financially and otherwise, the doctor and the state
would be liable for negligence.

8. • Compensation for forcible Demolition of Building –
• State of Mizoram V. Sh. Harangdawla
• It has been held that if a building of the petitioner is demolished
forcibly for construction of roads for public purpose a write petition
for compensation can be maintained for deprivation of fundamental
right of life. The remedy is available under the public law.

9. Compensatory in Tort -
• Option for compensation under M. V. Act or Workmen’s
compensation act ( sec. 167) –
• Where both acts are applicable the person entitled to compensation
may claim it at his option either under one act or the other but not
under both.
• In the case of a motor accident in the course of employment, the
employer of the deceased employee deposited the compensation
amount with the Workmen’s compensation commissioner.

10. • Award of compensation by the claim Tribunal (sec. 168) –
• On receipt of an application under section 166 , the claims Tribunal
has to give notice to the application to the insurer. It has then to give
an apportunity to the parties including the insurer of being heard. It
has then to hold an inquiry into the claim on each of the claim and
make an award determining the amount of compensation which
appears to it to be just. The order has to specify the amount which
has to be paid by the insurer, or owner or driver of the vehicle
involved in the accident or by all or any of them.

11. Critical Analysis -
• When a crime is committed against a person, the victims loses out a lot
apart from incurring damages and injuries. The work of a judiciary
should not only be to punish the guilty but also compensate the victim
as even if the accused is punished, the victims loss is not compensated.
The compensation given should at least try to put the victims in a state
in which he was before. It is not like victims of crime can never ask for
compensation as such a prayer is available under civil laws, but filing
two different suits for the same offence in two different courts.

12. Conclusion-
• We come to the conclusion that compensation is not only
required but is in fact a very important aspect of even criminal
law and the courts should not use this sparingly but a little
liberally of course they should be careful of not awarding too
high a compensation and hence should be careful.
• - Thank you