Victim Compensation Under Section 357A CrPC Applies to Crimes Before Its Enactment: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioner's minor daughter was raped in 2004. The accused was convicted under Sections 365 and 376 IPC by a fast-track Additional Sessions Court in Jaipur in 2005 and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment, but no compensation was awarded (para 2). On 19.09.2005 the petitioner asked the District Collector, Jaipur for Rs 3,00,000; the application remained undecided for want of any provision in law, and the child had received only Rs 10,000 from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund (paras 3, 9). In his Article 226 petition, the question was whether she could benefit from Section 357A CrPC, added by an amendment on 31.12.2009, and the 2011 Scheme, and whether the Scheme applies retrospectively or prospectively (paras 6, 9-10).

Section 357A, introduced on the basis of the 154th Law Commission Report, provides for compensation through State schemes even on acquittal; earlier, Section 357 allowed it only out of a fine (para 6). Compensating victims was not new: courts had granted it to rape victims, as in Chandrima Das, and Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh called for State-funded compensation even on acquittal or where the offender is untraced (paras 13-14). Section 357A does not say whether it is prospective or retrospective (para 15). The Kerala High Court in District Collector v. District Legal Service Authority held it substantive but remedial, so applying it to an earlier crime gives a prospective benefit based on an antecedent fact, not retrospective effect (para 16). Following that view, Achiya Bibi (Calcutta) and Vakalpudi Venkanna (Karnataka), the Court found no reason to differ (paras 17-19). Mohd. Haroon recognised the State's duty to compensate and rehabilitate victims (para 20). The Court held that Section 357A and the 2011 Scheme, whose Schedule allows up to Rs 3,00,000 for rape of a minor, apply to earlier incidents, entitling the petitioner's daughter to compensation (paras 7, 21-22).