The Supreme Court has held that the compensation awarded by a Trial Court under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. cannot be released while appeals against such orders are pending before the High Court as it may lead to multiplicity of proceedings.
Factual matrix
It is the case wherein the respondents-accused, all of whom were police officers, had detained the son of the appellant-complainant in connection with a theft case. The son was allegedly tortured in the lock-up and he succumbed to the injuries he had sustained. The Sessions Court, besides convicting the accused and awarding sentence to them accordingly, also exercised its powers under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. to award compensation to the appellant.
The respondents-accused preferred an appeal before the High Court against the conviction recorded and the sentence imposed by the Trial Court. The appellant-complainant also filed an appeal before the High Court for the release of the compensation amount (which was already deposited by all the respondents-accused but one) in his favor, but it was rejected and hence, the present appeal was filed by him before the Supreme Court of India.
Arguments on behalf of the Appellant
The counsel on behalf of the appellant submitted that the appellant is an old father of 76 years of age, who lost his son (20 years of age) to the tyranny of the respondents-accused who tortured him in the lock-up, which resulted in his death. The counsel emphasised that ever since the death of his son (14 years ago in 2006), the appellant has been fighting for justice and his fight has taken a huge toll on his mental and physical health. Further, the counsel while referring to the material placed on records submitted that “the appellant is suffering from serious ailments and is in dire need of money for his medical needs(…).” The counsel, therefore, urged the court to release the compensation amount, which had already been deposited by the accused, in favour of the appellant.
Arguments on behalf of the Respondents
The counsel representing the respondent-accused, submitted that the compensation awarded, the conviction recorded and sentence imposed by the Trial Court, are all subject-matter to the appeal preferred before the High Court and therefore, such compensation amount could not be released during the pendency of such appeals.
Observation of the Court
The Court acknowledged that the appellant has been relentlessly pursuing the matter for more than a decade. The Court also noticed that the rewarding of compensation by the Trial Court was well within its powers under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C.
Having perused the impugned order, material placed on record and the submissions made by the counsels from both the sides, the Court came to conclude that it was not ‘desirable to release such compensation in favour of the appellant’ while the appeals were pending before the High Court as it might lead to ‘multiplicity of proceedings’. Accordingly, the Court deemed it fit to not interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court regarding the release of compensation and requested the High Court to dispose of the appeals within 6 months from the date of its order (i.e. 6 months from 28th August, 2020).
Case details
Case name: Dalbir Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. etc.
Case No.: Crl.A.Nos. @ SLP(Crl.) D.No.13225 of 2020
Date: 28th August, 2020
Coram: Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice R. Subhash Reddy
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
