Victim-Centric Approach In Bns
What is Victim-Centric Approach?
A victim-centric approach in criminal justice focuses on the rights, dignity, and concerns of the victim or victim’s family during investigation, trial, bail, and sentencing.
It balances the accused's rights with the need to protect victims from further trauma or injustice.
This approach is crucial in Bail matters and Negotiated Settlements (BNS) where victims’ interests must be considered while deciding relief to accused.
Bail and Victim-Centric Approach
Bail is a fundamental right but is not absolute.
Courts weigh the accused’s right to liberty against victim’s safety and dignity.
Especially in heinous crimes, sexual offenses, or where there is risk of victim intimidation or trauma, courts adopt a victim-sensitive stance.
Victim impact statements and consent of victim sometimes guide bail decisions.
Negotiated Settlements (BNS)
In certain offenses like Section 138 NI Act (Cheque bounce), courts encourage BNS to reduce the burden on judicial system and provide quick justice.
Victim’s consent is paramount in such settlements.
In serious crimes, courts carefully ensure victims’ consent and interest before allowing settlement or bail.
Important Case Laws Highlighting Victim-Centric Approach in Bail and BNS
1. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1977) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Accused sought bail in a serious offense.
Victim’s family expressed fear and concern over bail.
Judgment:
The court held that victim’s safety and trauma must be considered while granting bail.
The right to bail is subject to the victim’s interest, especially if there is threat or intimidation.
Significance:
Early recognition that victim’s rights influence bail decisions.
2. Sudhir Kumar v. State of Haryana (2014) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Accused applied for bail in a sexual offense case.
Victim was a minor, family opposed bail.
Judgment:
Court emphasized safeguarding victim’s dignity and psychological well-being.
Bail was refused to protect victim from further trauma.
Significance:
Reinforced victim-centric approach in bail of sexual offenses.
3. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Case involved victim’s role in criminal justice reforms.
Discussion on victim compensation and participation.
Judgment:
Court emphasized victims’ rights to compensation, dignity, and role in criminal justice.
Urged reforms to make system more victim-friendly, especially during bail and trial.
Significance:
Landmark for broadening victim-centric reforms including bail process.
4. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962) — Supreme Court
Facts:
High-profile case with victim’s family deeply affected.
Bail considerations included public and victim sentiments.
Judgment:
Court recognized impact of crime on victims and families in bail decisions.
Set precedent to consider victim’s emotions.
Significance:
Influenced later victim-sensitive bail jurisprudence.
5. S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Case about public order but emphasized victim’s dignity.
Bail application involved consideration of victim’s sentiments.
Judgment:
The court ruled that victim’s dignity and consent must be considered in granting bail.
Harm to victim weighs against bail.
Significance:
Affirmed victim’s dignity in bail matters.
6. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Bail in cases under Sections 498A (dowry harassment).
Victims feared harassment from accused if bail granted.
Judgment:
Court issued guidelines requiring careful balancing of victim’s protection with accused’s liberty.
Directed recording of victim’s statement during bail hearing.
Significance:
Victim-centric procedural safeguards in bail hearings.
7. Re: The Victim Compensation Scheme (2018) — Supreme Court
Facts:
Examined victim compensation and role during criminal proceedings.
Judgment:
Court reiterated victim’s right to justice and participation, influencing bail and settlement.
Ensured victims are not sidelined during bail or BNS.
Significance:
Institutionalized victim rights in bail and settlements.
Summary Table
| Case | Year | Court | Victim-Centric Element in Bail/BNS |
|---|---|---|---|
| State of Rajasthan v. Balchand | 1977 | SC | Victim safety considered in bail |
| Sudhir Kumar v. Haryana | 2014 | SC | Bail refused to protect minor victim |
| Common Cause v. Union of India | 2018 | SC | Emphasized victim rights in reforms |
| K.M. Nanavati v. Maharashtra | 1962 | SC | Victim family impact on bail |
| S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal | 2010 | SC | Victim dignity in bail decisions |
| Arnesh Kumar v. Bihar | 2014 | SC | Procedural safeguards for victims in bail |
| Victim Compensation Scheme Case | 2018 | SC | Victim participation and compensation |
Conclusion:
The victim-centric approach in bail and BNS represents a shift from offender-focused justice towards inclusive, balanced justice.
Courts now routinely consider victim’s safety, dignity, consent, and trauma in bail and negotiated settlements.
This approach helps ensure that victims are not re-victimized by the criminal process.
It also supports restorative justice principles, promoting healing and closure.
If you want, I can help you draft an academic paper or detailed legal analysis on this topic!
RELATED Blog
0 comments