Supreme Court to Hear Plea for Equal Compensation in Hate Crime & Mob Lynching Cases
- ByAdmin --
- 24 Apr 2025 --
- 0 Comments
The Supreme Court of India is set to hear a significant plea regarding the issue of compensation for victims of hate crimes and mob lynching. The petition, filed by social activists and rights organizations, demands that victims of hate crimes, particularly those targeted based on their religion, caste, or community, be entitled to equal compensation under the law. This petition has raised crucial questions about the state's responsibility to protect its citizens and the inadequacy of the current legal frameworks in addressing the needs of victims of such heinous acts.
Background of the Petition
Hate crimes and mob lynching have emerged as a grave concern in India over the past few years. These acts of violence are typically motivated by prejudice or intolerance against particular groups based on religion, caste, or ethnicity. In the wake of such incidents, victims and their families often face severe physical and emotional trauma, yet they are sometimes left without adequate compensation or justice.
The petitioners argue that the compensation scheme for victims of hate crimes is inconsistent, with some cases receiving compensation while others, despite the severity of the crime, are not granted relief. The petition calls for a uniform, fair, and transparent compensation system for all victims of hate crimes and lynchings, irrespective of the identity of the victim or the circumstances of the case.
Key Issues Raised in the Petition
- Inconsistent Compensation:
- The petitioners highlight the issue of inconsistent compensation offered to victims of mob lynching and hate crimes. They argue that there is no uniform standard for compensation, and the amount often varies depending on the state or region, leading to discrepancies in justice delivery.
- The petitioners highlight the issue of inconsistent compensation offered to victims of mob lynching and hate crimes. They argue that there is no uniform standard for compensation, and the amount often varies depending on the state or region, leading to discrepancies in justice delivery.
- Lack of Legal Clarity on Compensation:
- While there are laws that govern compensation for victims of violence, such as the Victim Compensation Scheme under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2008, there is a lack of clarity in the application of these laws specifically in the context of mob lynching and hate crimes. The petition seeks a clear legal framework that mandates fair compensation for such victims.
- While there are laws that govern compensation for victims of violence, such as the Victim Compensation Scheme under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2008, there is a lack of clarity in the application of these laws specifically in the context of mob lynching and hate crimes. The petition seeks a clear legal framework that mandates fair compensation for such victims.
- The Role of the State:
- The petition emphasizes that the state must take responsibility for ensuring the safety and security of all its citizens. It contends that the failure to provide adequate compensation and justice in the wake of hate crimes is a violation of the constitutional mandate to protect individuals from harm and discrimination.
- The petition emphasizes that the state must take responsibility for ensuring the safety and security of all its citizens. It contends that the failure to provide adequate compensation and justice in the wake of hate crimes is a violation of the constitutional mandate to protect individuals from harm and discrimination.
- Need for a Uniform National Policy:
- The petitioners urge the Supreme Court to direct the government to establish a uniform national policy for the compensation of hate crime victims, ensuring equal treatment across states. This policy would provide a clear mechanism for assessing and compensating victims promptly and transparently.
Legal Framework and Constitutional Provisions
- Article 21 of the Indian Constitution:
- Article 21 guarantees the "Right to Life and Personal Liberty" to every individual in India. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that this right includes the protection from unlawful violence and the duty of the state to provide compensation to victims of such violence.
- In Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995), the Court recognized the importance of ensuring justice for victims of violence and the state’s responsibility to compensate them.
- Article 21 guarantees the "Right to Life and Personal Liberty" to every individual in India. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that this right includes the protection from unlawful violence and the duty of the state to provide compensation to victims of such violence.
- Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2008:
- The amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code and Indian Penal Code introduced provisions to provide compensation to victims of crimes. Section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) mandates the establishment of Victim Compensation Schemes by the states, but their implementation has been inconsistent.
- The amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code and Indian Penal Code introduced provisions to provide compensation to victims of crimes. Section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) mandates the establishment of Victim Compensation Schemes by the states, but their implementation has been inconsistent.
- National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Guidelines:
- The NHRC has issued guidelines for the protection of victims of crime, including provisions for compensation in cases of mob violence and hate crimes. However, these guidelines lack enforceability, and many victims do not receive the compensation they are entitled to.
- The NHRC has issued guidelines for the protection of victims of crime, including provisions for compensation in cases of mob violence and hate crimes. However, these guidelines lack enforceability, and many victims do not receive the compensation they are entitled to.
- International Human Rights Law:
- Under international human rights law, particularly the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the state has an obligation to protect individuals from violence and ensure access to justice. The non-compensation for victims of mob lynching and hate crimes may be viewed as a breach of India’s international obligations.
Potential Impact of the Case
The Supreme Court’s hearing of this petition could mark a significant turning point in the way India addresses the issue of mob lynching and hate crimes. Should the Court rule in favor of the petitioners, several key developments could occur:
- Uniform Compensation Framework:
- The Court may direct the central government to develop and implement a national compensation framework that applies equally across all states, ensuring that victims of hate crimes and mob lynching receive adequate financial assistance and legal aid.
- The Court may direct the central government to develop and implement a national compensation framework that applies equally across all states, ensuring that victims of hate crimes and mob lynching receive adequate financial assistance and legal aid.
- Strengthening Legal Protections:
- The ruling could lead to stronger legal safeguards for victims, ensuring that they are not only compensated for the harm caused but also receive justice through proper investigations and prosecutions.
- The ruling could lead to stronger legal safeguards for victims, ensuring that they are not only compensated for the harm caused but also receive justice through proper investigations and prosecutions.
- Increased Accountability:
- The case may also highlight the need for greater accountability from both state and local governments in preventing hate crimes and providing justice to victims. A uniform compensation policy could prompt the authorities to take proactive measures in curbing such crimes.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could set a precedent for the treatment of victims of hate crimes and mob lynching in India. If the Court directs the government to create a uniform compensation policy, it would be a significant step toward ensuring that victims are treated with dignity and receive the support they deserve in the aftermath of such traumatic events.
RELATED Blog
0 comments