Legal Services Authority Must Provide Reasons For Quantum Of Compensation Decided U/S 357A CrPC: Delhi High Court

Section 357A contemplates that in cases where the offender is not traced or identified, the victim or his dependents are entitled to compensation under the District Victim Compensation Scheme, 2018.

Upon consideration of an application, the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) is required to conduct an enquiry and thereafter award adequate compensation pursuant to Section 357A(5).

The Schedule to the DVC Scheme sets out the minimum and maximum limit on the compensation. In cases of loss of life of the victim, the DLSA may award a minimum compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs and a maximum compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs.

In the case at hand, Justice Sachin Datta was dealing with a petition challenging award of minimum compensation for the accidental death of Petitioners' husband and father respectively, who was working as a security guard.

Since the deceased was hit by an unknown vehicle and the offending person could not be traced, the Petitioners were granted liberty to approach the concerned DLSA for grant of compensation.

After an enquiry, the DLSA passed the impugned order awarding compensation of Rs. 3,00,000.

Petitioners contended that the quantum of the award is inadequate given the dependency of two unmarried daughters, a mentally challenged son and pending loans.

It was further submitted that the impugned order fails to provide any reasoning or calculation criteria, on the basis of which, the petitioners have been awarded the minimum amount of compensation.

At the outset, the High Court noted that the deceased was earning around Rs. 13,000 – 15,000 per month and now the only surviving earning member in the family made a mere Rs.7,000.

“The wife is stated to be a home maker and the elder son is mentally challenged. The daughters are also stated to have been in school at the time and are desirous of pursuing higher education. Hence, it can be reasonably concluded that the family was heavily dependent on the income of the deceased and the loss to the petitioners due to the death of Shri Hari Chand is quite substantial in nature,” Court said.

However, despite the aforesaid circumstances, it noted that the impugned order fails to provide any reasoning for awarding only Rs. 3 lakhs i.e. the minimum amount of compensation under the DVC Scheme.

It pressed that among the various factors to be considered while awarding compensation, the DLSA was required to take into account:

• Financial loss to the victim or dependents extent and period of the same

• In case of death, the age of deceased, his monthly income, number of dependents, life expectancy, future promotional/growth prospects etc.

It relied on Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra (2013) where the Supreme Court held that in cases where compensation is awarded under Section 357-A CrPC, the authority is required to “apply its mind to the question of awarding compensation”.

As such, the Court enhanced the award and ordered grant of maximum compensation to the Petitioners.

Appearance: Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocate for Petitioners; Mr. Hetu Arora Sethi, ASC (GNCTD) along with Ms. Avni Singh, PC, Mr. Prakhar Mani Tripathi and Mr. Arjun Basra, for GNCTD. Mr. Vinay Rathi and Mr. Vikrant Dhama, Advocates for R-3.

Case title: Smt. Nirmala And Another v. The State And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 620

Case no.: W.P.(C) 7582/2023

Click here to read order