The Karnataka High Court has ruled in the context of POCSO trials that only the special court possesses the authority to quantify compensation for child victims under the NALSA scheme.
It has also stated that the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) is legally bound to implement the compensation determined by the special court. Furthermore, the court emphasized that when assessing the compensation amount, the trial court must take into consideration various factors, including the evidence presented during the trial, the extent of the victim's injuries, the circumstances surrounding the offense, and the specific needs of the victim child, such as rehabilitation, medical treatment, and education.
Brief Facts:
The brief facts of the case are that an appeal is being considered by this court based on a complaint filed by Smt. Lalitha against Narasimha Siddi. The complaint led to the registration of a criminal case under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act at Yellapur Police Station, with case number 219/2010. The accused was tried for these offenses in special case No. 13/2021. After evaluating the evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty and issued a judgment on January 17, 2022, followed by a sentence order on January 18, 2022. The trial court awarded a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 357(1) of the Cr. P.C, along with a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 357(A) of the Cr.P.C, for the rehabilitation of the victim girl. The court directed the District Legal Service Authority (DLSA) to deposit the total amount in the name of the victim girl in a nationalized bank. The following moot questions were raised for consideration:
- Whether Karnataka victim compensation scheme, 2011 (in shot 'KVCS') and POCSO Act, what is the adequate amount of compensation at the interim and final stage?
- Whether the special Court constituted under POCSO Act competent to quantify the compensation or the DLSA?
- Whether victims of offences under the provisions of POCSO can approach either the Special Court or the respondent authorities for compensation including interim compensation?
Observations of the Court:
The court referred to the Nipun Saxena v. Union of India case, where the Supreme Court directed that until a compensation scheme specifically for child victims in POCSO cases is established, the NALSA compensation scheme should serve as a reference for special courts to determine compensation for child victims of sexual abuse.
Considering the circumstances of the current case, where the victim is a minor girl who is mentally challenged and unable to speak and has been subjected to penetrative sexual assault by the accused, the court granted the appeal made by the victim's mother. The court modified the trial court's order, which had initially awarded Rs 1 lakh as compensation to the victim, and instead ordered the payment of Rs. 10,50,000.
The court emphasized the importance of taking a practical approach towards the welfare and well-being of the victim child when awarding interim and final compensation as part of their rehabilitation process. The court stated that trial courts should act as guardians for the victim's child and prioritize their care. In the specific case, the trial court had convicted the accused under the relevant provision of the POCSO Act and had granted Rs.1,00,000 compensation under Section 357(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), and an additional Rs.1,00,000 under Section 357(A) of the CrPC.
The court observed that Section 33 of the POCSO Act empowers the special court to grant compensation. It further mentioned that for women victims of crimes, the applicable schedule mandates a minimum compensation of Rs.4,00,000 and an upper limit of Rs.7,00,000. Clause 9 of the NALSA's scheme stipulates that if the victim is a minor, the compensation amount should be 50% higher than the figure mentioned in the schedule attached to this section.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court allowed the present appeal and modified the trial court order in terms of compensation.
Case Title: Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Anil B. Katti
Case no: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100269 OF 2022
Advocate for the Appellant: Advocate Narayan G Rasalkar
Advocate for the Respondent: - HCGP Praveen K Uppar
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
