INTRODUCTION
The victim, according to Section 2(1)(y)[1] of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, means “a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission of the accused person and includes the guardian or legal heir of such victim.” That is to say, the victim is a person who suffers due to the act or omission of another person. Therefore, it becomes important to ensure that such a victim gets compensated and that all his rights are protected.
However, for a long time, these rights of the victims have been largely ignored. While during ancient times the rights of the victim were recognised and the victim was also compensated, and the focus was largely on rehabilitation, this view drastically changed during the colonial era. The British introduced the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure in India, which promoted an “offender-centric” or “accused-centric” approach and reduced the role of the victim to that of an informant with few or no procedural rights. This continued even after independence due to the continuous usage of the colonial-era criminal justice system.
In order to ensure that the rights of the victims are protected, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was introduced, which consists of various provisions which aim to protect the rights of the victims, ensuring that their rights are protected. One of the most important among all is the Victim Compensation Scheme provided under section 396 of BNSS, 2023. Focusing upon the rights and needs of the victim is important because the state has always been concerned about the rehabilitation of the convict once he is out of prison, but what about the rehabilitation of the victim when the horror of the crime continues to haunt him?[2]
VICTIMS AND THEIR RIGHTS UNDER BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA
Victim Rights Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:
Section 2(1)(y)[3]: Defines a victim as someone who suffers harm due to the accused’s act or omission. Includes legal heirs and guardians.
Section 18(8) Proviso [4] & Section 338(2)[5]: According to these sections, the victims may appoint an advocate to assist the public prosecutor. However, the advocate’s role is limited to written submissions post-evidence, potentially causing conflict in trial strategy. Thereby safeguarding victim interests.
Section 173(2)[6]: This section ensures that victims or informants are entitled to a free copy of the FIR, thereby ensuring transparency from the start of the investigation.
Section 184[7]: It mandates medical examination within 24 hours by a registered practitioner, and the report must be sent to the investigating officer within 7 days, as such reports often help in ensuring that the investigation is being done in the right direction.
Section 193(3)(ii)[8]: This section mandates that the victims must be informed of investigation progress within 90 days, via any communication method, thereby providing oversight of the fact-finding process.
Section 230[9]: It also mandates receiving free copies of FIR, police reports, witness statements, confessions, and other relevant documents within 14 days of filing.
Section 360 Proviso[10]: As per this section, courts cannot allow withdrawal of a public prosecutor without first hearing the victim, ensuring their voice in trial decisions, and ensuring that their rights are protected.
Section 395(3)[11]: According to this section, even if no fine is imposed, courts can direct the accused to compensate the victim for harm suffered, ensuring that the accused is made liable for the harm caused by him to the victim.
Section 396[12]: According to this section, the state and central governments must create schemes for victim rehabilitation, and the Legal Services Authorities must determine and disburse compensation, including in cases of acquittal or unidentified accused, ensuring that every victim is compensated for the harm caused to them.
Section 397[13]: As per this section, the hospitals must provide free, immediate medical aid to victims of rape and POCSO offences, and the police must be notified; however, this is right, and protection is not extended to victims of trafficking or acid attacks.
Section 413 Proviso[14]: As per this section, the victims can appeal against acquittals, lesser convictions, or inadequate compensation, therefore strengthening their role in post-trial justice.
VICTIM COMPENSATION SCHEME – SECTION 396 BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA
Victim compensation refers to the monetary or non-monetary assistance provided by the state to victims of crime to alleviate their suffering and facilitate their recovery.[15] Internationally, the United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (1985)[16] has played a pivotal role in advocating for victim compensation. It advocates for state-funded compensation schemes for the victims of serious crimes, particularly in those cases where such victims find it difficult to get compensation from the accused person.
In India, the Victim Compensation Scheme was not originally part of the criminal justice system. It was added in the CrPC via the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008[17], being governed under Section 357A[18]. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has further expanded the scheme and has included it within itself under Section 396[19]. It views victims not just as complainants but also as individuals who are entitled to financial and medical support, especially when they experience loss or injury due to a crime committed by a person against them.
Section 396 provides that the State Government works together with the Central Government to make and implement various compensation schemes for victims who have suffered physical, emotional, or monetary damage due to the act or omission of another.
Role of District Legal Services Authorities and State Legal Services Authorities:
The section also provides the detailed procedure that shall be followed by District Legal Services Authorities or State Legal Services Authorities, as the case may be. According to the section
1) The District Legal Services Authorities or State Legal Services Authorities are required to complete the inquiry within 2 months from the date of receipt.
2) Whenever the court makes a recommendation for compensation, then District Legal Services Authorities or State Legal Services Authorities shall decide the amount of award to be compensated; also, in cases where the accused can’t be found, then in such cases DLSA or SLSA shall provide the compensation.
3) The State or the District Legal Services Authority, as the case may be, to alleviate the suffering of the victim, may order immediate first-aid facilities or medical benefits to be made available free of cost on the certificate of the police officer not below the rank of the officer in charge of the police station or a magistrate of the area concerned, or any other interim relief as the appropriate authority deems fit.[20]
Supplementary to Section 395: Section 395 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita allows courts to order the accused to pay compensation to the victim. However, when the amount awarded may not fully cover the victim’s expenses, then in such cases, Section 396 allows the trial court to recommend additional compensation when the amount under Section 395 is insufficient.
National Legal Services Authorities Scheme: Following the directions from the Supreme Court given in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India[21], the National Legal Services Authority has also developed various compensation schemes, such as the Central Victim Compensation Fund (CVCF), which supports various forms of victims, such as those of sexual offences, acid attacks, and human trafficking, and has also provided guidelines for states.
CASES
Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh (1988)[22]: The Supreme Court ruled that awarding compensation is a positive measure to respond to a crime and to help reconcile the victim with the offender.
Manish Jalan v. State of Karnataka (2008)[23]: The Supreme Court provided guidance on determining the compensation amount according to the nature of the crime, the injury, and the offender’s financial capacity and also focused on the need for a reasonable amount.
CHALLENGES
Lack of Awareness: Many victims, particularly from marginalised or rural communities, remain unaware of their statutory right to apply for compensation; this perpetuates secondary victimisation, as eligible claimants forgo claims, exacerbating financial and emotional distress.
Insufficient Compensation Amounts: Compensation awarded is not always sufficient to meet all the expenses. Awards under victim compensation schemes often fall short of actual losses, covering only basic medical expenses while ignoring long-term rehabilitation, lost wages, psychological trauma, family support needs, etc.
Delays in Compensation Disbursement: Prolonged processing times often exceeding 6-12 months due to bureaucratic red tape, incomplete documentation, multi-level approvals, and court backlogs delay justice, compounding victims’ hardships amid mounting medical bills and livelihood disruptions.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Awareness Campaigns: The Legal Services Authorities should launch nationwide awareness campaigns via TV, radio, social media, and community legal clinics and also try to integrate compensation rights education into school curricula and police training and should also develop multilingual helplines and mobile apps for easy claim filing.
Revision of Compensation Slabs: The Legal Services Authorities must revise compensation slabs periodically, cost-of-living indices, and introduce needs-based assessments via multidisciplinary committees, including medical and financial experts.
Strict Timelines: Enforce strict timelines with digital tracking portals for applications and provide interim compensation within 30 days, and penalise delays through accountability mechanisms for officials.
CONCLUSION
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has made the criminal justice system victim-centric, ensuring that the rights of the victims are protected. One of the most important steps for this has been the Victim Compensation Scheme under Section 396 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which ensures that the victims who have suffered any kind of harm, be it physical, emotional or financial, shall be able to get adequate compensation. Such victim-centred provisions help ensure that the victims are not regarded just as the complainants, but also ensure that they can protect their rights and interests under the Indian Criminal Justice System.
Author’s Name: Gauri Khandelwal (Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, New Delhi)
References:
[1] Section 2(1)(y), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023
[2] Shivika Goyal, ‘Repositioning the Victim: A Critical Analysis of Victim Centric Justice in India’ (2025) 5(11) Indian Journal of Legal Review 499
[3] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 2(1)(y).
[4] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 18(8).
[5] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 338(2).
[6] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 173(2).
[7] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 184.
[8] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 193(3)(ii).
[9] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 230.
[10] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 360.
[11]Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 395(3).
[12] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 396.
[13] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 397.
[14] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 413.
[15] Shuvam Deep, ‘Understanding Victim Compensation in India: A Review of Statutory Framework and Judicial Trends’ (2023) 1(9) ACR Journal https://acr-journal.com/article/understanding-victim-compensation-in-india-a-review-of-statutory-framework-and-judicial-trends-1933/ accessed 26 January 2026.
[16] UNGA ‘Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power’ (29 November 1985)
[17] Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2008.
[18] Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, s 357A.
[19] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 396.
[20] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 396.
[21] Nipun Saxena v Union of India (2019) 2 SCC 703.
[22] Hari Singh v Sukhbir Singh (1988) 4 SCC 551.
[23] Manish Jalan v State of Karnataka (2008) 8 SCC 225.
