PROJECT REPORTON

VICTIMOLOGY ANDEMERGING TRENDS

Submitted to : Submitted by:

Ms. Anju Berwal Anurag Singh Sindhal

15/09

10th semester

2009-14

CONCEPT OF VICTIMOLOGY IN INDIA

Victimology  is  science  of  study  of  the  relationship  between  victims  and  violators  of  law  or  offenders.

The    victim is the forgotten man of our criminal justice system.  He  sets  the  criminal  law  in to  motion  but  then  goes  into  oblivion.  The  present  code  of  criminal  procedure  does  not  recognize  the  right  of  victim  to  take  part  in  the  prosecution  of  the  case  instituted  on  the  basis  of  police  report. The  victim  is  merely  a  witness  in  a  State  versus  case.  He  has  no  rights  to  prefer  appeal  against  the  order  of  acquittal  of  the  accused  by   trial  court  in   a  criminal  case  started  by  State.  The  State  reserves  the  discretion  not  to  prefer  and  also  to  withdraw  from  the  prosecution  even  in  heinous  offences.  The  victim  of  crime  becomes the  victim  of  our  criminal  justice  system  when  the  political  motivated  investigation  agency  or  prosecuting  agency  shows  lack  of  interest   or  apathy  in  the  matter  of  investigation  or  prosecution  on extraneous  consideration.

Innovative   approach     of   apex   court.

The Supreme  Court  has  forged  new  tools,  devised  new  methods  and  adopted  new  strategies  for  the  purpose  of  making  fundamental  rights  meaningful  even  to  the  victims  of  crime  of  crime  in  AIR  1995  SC 14,  the  Supreme  Court  directed  the  State  of  Uttar  Pradesh  to  suspend  and  start  disciplinary  action  against  two  police  officers  and  one  medical  officer  for  making  perfunctory  investigation  of  rape  case  to  pay  the  amount  of  Rs.2,50,000/-  as  compensation.

There  is  plethora  of   decisions,  where  Supreme Court  awarded  compensation  to  the  victims,  whose  plight  was  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  apex  court  either  by  themselves  or  by  way  of  public  interest  litigation.  Millions  of  victims  of  crime,  who  cannot  approach  the  apex  court  out  of   ignorance  of  lack  of  resources  are  still  crying  for  justice  with  the  aim  of  protecting  the  human  rights  of  victim  in  our  criminal  justice  system  and   to  fulfill  the  constitutional  obligation.  The  Supreme 

court  should  ask  the  Government  to  confer  jurisdiction  on  the  criminal  courts  by  making  statutory  provision  for  the  compensation  of  the  victims  of  crime,  irrespective  of  whether  the  accused  is  convicted  or not  and  to  make  statutory  provision  for  participation  of  the  victim  in   prosecution,  along  with  prosecuting  agency  in a  criminal  case  instituted  on  report  of  police.

Compensation   &   the   need   for   sensitization   of   judiciary

Legislation  conferred  jurisdiction  on the  criminal  courts  under  section  357(3)  of  the  code  of  criminal  procedure  for  awarding  unlimited  amount  of  compensation  to the  victims  at  the  time  of  passing  judgment  of  conviction.  This  provision  is  not  ancillary  to  other  provisions  of  criminal  procedure  code, but  in  addition  thereto.  By  the  landmark  judgment  in  Hari  Kisan’s  case  AIR  1988 SC 2127  Supreme Court  not  only  awarded  compensation  of  Rs.50,000/-  to  the  victim,  but  also  directed  the  subordinate  criminal  courts  to  exercise  the  power  of  awarding  compensation  to  the  victims  of  offences  in  such  a  liberal  way  that  the  victims  may  not  have  to  rush  to  the  civil  courts  for  compensation  to  the  victims.  Unfortunately,  the  subordinate  judiciary  is  rarely  invoking this  provision  to  award  compensation  to  the victims,  where  the  accused  persons  are  acquitted  of  the  charge  on  benefit  of  doubt  or  on  any  technicalities  of  laws.

The  General  Assembly  of  the  United  Nation’s  has recommended  payment  of  compensation  to  the  victims  of  crime  by  the  State,  when  compensation  is  not  fully  available  from  the  offender or  other  sources.  Unfortunately,  the  victims  of  communal  riots, dacoity, arson  and  rape  are not  getting  compensation  in  our  present  justice  system.  Since  the  State  is  under  duty  to  protect  the  life,  liberty  and  security  of  its  citizens,  it  is  bound  to  pay  compensation  to  the  victims  of  crime  irrespective  of  whether  the  accused  is  convicted  or  acquitted of  the  criminal  charge.  As the  government  is  indifferent to  the  crying  need  of  the  victims,  the  apex  court  directed  the  Government  to  set  up  a  criminal  injuries  compensation  Board,  under  the  supervision  of  criminal  courts  for  awarding  compensation  to victims  of  all  crimes  including  rape  or  dacoity,  in  addition  to  the  directions  given  to  National  Commission for  women  to  evolve  a  proposal  for  rehabilitation  and  compensatory  justice  to  rape  victims.

Payment  of  compensation  to  the  victims  of  crime  for  any  injury  caused  to  him  has  not  been  institutionalized  under the  Indian  Penal  Laws.  Nor  any  legal  right  to  be  compensated  has  been  created  in  favour  of  the  victim. In  case  of   irreversible  injury  monetary  compensation  is  the  sole  effective  remedy. In  India   there  is  neither  a  comprehensive  legislation  nor  a  statutory  scheme  providing  for  compensation  by  State  to  offender  to  victims  of  crime.

The  legislative  vacuum  of  a  legal  right  to  monetary  compensation   for  violation  of  human  rights  has  been  supplemented  by  the  higher  judiciary  by  developing  a  parallel   constitutional  remedy.  In  AIR  1983 SC  1086  the  Supreme  Court  for  the  first  time  in  Rudal Sah  Vs.  State  of  Bihar  made  it  categorically  clear  that  the  higher  judiciary  has  the  power  to  award  compensation  for  violation  of  fundamental  rights  through  the  exercise  of   writ  jurisdiction  and  evolved  the  principle  of  compensatory  justice  in  the  annals  of  human  rights  jurisprudence.  In  Oraon  Vs.  State  of  Bihar  the  Supreme  Court  direct  State  of  Bihar  to  pay  the  sum  of  Rs.15,000/-  as  compensation  to  Bhama  Oraon  who  was  illegally  detained  for  6  years  and  kept  in  mental  hospital  when  he  was  not  in same.  In  Sebastain  Vs.  Union  of  India  AIR  1984  SC 1826,  on  account  of  failure  of  Government  to  produce  in  habeas  corpus  petition  filed  by  wives,  apex  court  awarded  cost  of  Rs. 1  lac  to  be  given  to  wife  of  each  of  detenne.

Compensation   to   Rape   victims :   Right  of  the  rape  victim  to  receive  compensation  flows  from  Art.21  of  the  constitution.  Every  court  has jurisdiction  to   grant  compensation  not  only  at  the  final  stage  of  trial  but  also  to  award  interim  compensation  at  any  interlocutory  stage   of  trial  in  view  of  reported  judgment  in  AIR  1996 SC 922.  In  1995(1)  SCC 14  -  Supreme  Court  in  case  of  Delhi  Domestic  Working  Women’s  Forum  Vs.  Union  of  India,  indicated  a  scheme  to  award  compensation  to  rape  victim  both  at  the  time  of  trial  i.e.,   interim  compensation  to  rape  victim   and  at  the  end  of  the  trial.  The  Supreme  Court  suggested  the  establishment  of  criminal  injuries  compensation  Board  under  Art. 38(1)  of  the  Constitution  of  India.  The  rape  victim  shall  be  paid  compensation  by  this  Criminal  injuries  compensation  board  or   the  court  and  while  awarding  compensation   the  following  particulars  are  to  be  taken  into  account  to  calculate  the  compensation  amount  i.e.,  pain,  suffering  and  shocks  experienced  by  the  victims  and  also  loss  of  earnings  due  to  pregnancy  and  the  expenses  of  child  birth  if 

this  occurs  as  a  result  of  the  rape..  Unfortunately  till  now  this  criminal  injuries  compensation  Board  has  not  been  established  by  the  Central  Government.

In  D.K.  Basu  Vs.  State of  west  Bengal ( 1997) I  SCC  P-4,  the  landmark  judgment  Supreme  Court  has  laid  down  number  of  guidelines   to  prevent  custodial  violence   including  rape,  and  has recognized   that  custodial  rape  could  be  compensated  as  the  same  violated  Rights  to  life  and  personal  liberty  guaranteed  under  Article  21  of  the  Constitution.  In  bodhi  Sattra  Goutham  Vs.  Subhra  Chakraborthy  the  Hon’ble  Apex  Court   has  held  that  the  court  of  session  have  every  authority  to  award  interim  compensation  if  prime  facie  case  against   the  accused  has  been  established  that  a  person   had  sexual  relationship  with  the  prosecutrix  on  false  assurance  of  marriage.  Supreme  Court  has  directed  the  guilty   person  to  pay  Rs.1000/-  pm  as  interim  compensation  to  the  prosecutrix  during  pendency  of  case.  This  judgment  is  a  precedent  for  granting  interim  compensation  to  the  rape  victims.  In  case   of  State  of  Maharashtra  Vs.  Madhukar  N. Mardikar  (1991 )  I  SCC  57  Supreme  court  held  that  even  a  prostitute  has  a  right  to  privacy  and  no  person  can  rape  her  just  because  she  is  a  woman  of  easy  virtue.

The   duty   of   Court   while   trying   rape   cases :      The   police,  court  and  lawyers  should  come  forward  to  provide  all  sorts  of  assistance  to  victims  of  rape.  Courts  must  deal  with  such  cases  with  utmost  sensitivity.  The  court  should  examine  the  broader  probabilities  of  case  and  not  get  swayed  by  minor  contradictions  or  insignificant  discrepancies  in  witness  statements.  The  court  should  also  provide  adequate  financial  assistance  to  the  victim  of  rape.  It  could  also  award  interim  compensation  as  in  Rathinam  /  State  of  Gujarat  the  court  awarded  interim  compensation  to  tribal  woman  who  was  illegally  raped  in  police  custody  in  the  presence  of  her  husband.  Sum  of  Rs.50,000/- was  provided  by  the  State  of  Gujarat.  Apart  from  providing  financial  assistance   the victim  should  be  provided  medical, social, psychological  assistance  which  would  help  her  to  come  out  of  her  trauma.

U/s. 18(3)  of  the  protection  of  Human  Rights  Act 1993  National  Human  Rights  Commission  has  powers   to  advance  the  cause  of  compensatory  justice  to  the  victims  of  Torture.

There  is  ample  scope  of  law  reform  to  protect  the   victims  of  sexual  offences  in  general  and  the  victims  of  rape in  particular.  Evidence  Act   be  amended  suitably.  Evidence  of  victim  be  taken  in  close  room. Defense  counsel  be  prohibited  from  putting  question on  past  character  of  victim.  Judges  and  prosecutors  may  be  sanitized  to  the  need  of  evaluation  of  evidence  of  victims  of  rape.

Though  there  is  a  need  of  legislation  in  the  field,  it  is  equally  essential  to  implement   the  existing  provisions.  The  people  should  be  aware  of  these  laws  for  their  effective  implementation.  All  concern  responsible  citizen  should  take  effective  steps  to  implement  the  provisions  under  law.

We  have  to  activate  our  Indian  society  of  victimology.  The non-governmental  organization  on  14th  August, 1992  has  formed  a  society  called  as  Indian   society  of  victimology   in  Madras  many  social scientists,  professionals, research  scholars,  students  &  criminal  justice  functionaries  interested  in  cause of  victims  of  crime  India,  a  convened  by  Prof. Chockalingam  &  decided  to  start  working  under  the  society  named  as “ Indian  Society  of  victimology”.  He  was  1st  unanimously  elected  president .  On  18/09/94  former  Judge  of  Supreme  Court  of  India  V.R. Krishna  Iyer  has  inaugurated  the  same.

There  were  5  symposia   organized  by  Indian  society  of  victimology.  First  Biennial  conference  was  orgainsed  at  Madras  from  12th &  14th  August, 1994.  Govt.  of  Tamilnadu  has  set  up  a  victim  assistance  fund  in  April, 1995.  Tamilnadu  is  1st  state  in  India  to  set  up  such  a fund  to assist  victims  of  violent  crimes  in  pursuance  of  the   recommendation  of  Indian  society  of  victimology. 

There  is  a  need  to  see  for  the  criminal  Justice  reforms  and  victims’  rights  organizations   to  become  more  active.  Govt. of  Maharashtra  women and  child  development  Dept., various  Boards  and  women  commission  should  become  active  in  formation  of  the  group  to  help  such  victims  of  crime.

On  14th August 1992, many  social  Scientists,  Professors, Research  Scholars, Students & Criminal  Justice  functionaries  interested  in  cause  of  victims  of  crime  met  at  Dept.  of  victimology  at  University  of  Madras  in  India  and  decided  to  start  an  organization  in  the  name  of  Indian  Society  of   victimology .  He was elected unopposed as President.

Victimology

Until recently, victims were not studied. They tended to be seen as passive recipients of the criminal’s greed or anger, “in the wrong place at the wrong time.” The study of victims, known as victimology, has resulted in theoretical and research studies, and an awareness of the victim has grown in the public consciousness. There is now recognition that victims have traditionally not been treated particularly well by the criminal justice system. Victims suffer not only during the crime, but that there are also sometimes physical and psychological complications.

Perhaps the first theory to explain victimization was developed by Wolfgang in his study of murders in Philadelphia. Victim precipitation theory argues that there are victims who actually initiated the confrontation that led to their injuries and deaths. Although this was the result of the study of only one type of crime, the idea was first raised that victims also might play a role in the criminal activity.

Subsequently, some general facts have been gathered about victimization.

• Victimization is more likely at night (6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). Personal larceny is more common during the day, with more serious crime occurring at night.

• Crime occurs more in open public areas, although rapes and simple assaults tend to occur in homes.

• Crime is most frequent in central city areas.

• Western urban areas have the highest crime rates, while the Northeast rural areas have the lowest.

• The National Crime Survey indicates that 25% of U.S. households have at least one individual who was victimized in some way during the past year.

• Personal theft is very common. About 99% of Americans will be the victim of personal theft at some time in their lives, and 87% will be a theft victim three or more times.

• Men are twice as likely as women to be victims of robbery and assault. The violent victimization rate for females has been fairly stable, but there has been a 20% increase for males in the last 15 years.

• Victim risk diminishes rapidly after age 25. Contrary to popular belief, grandparents are safer than their grandchildren.

• Unmarried/never married people are more likely to be victims than the married or widowed.

• The poor are more likely to be victims of crime. They are far more likely to be victims of violent crime, while the middle class are more likely to be victims of property crime.

• African Americans are victimized at the highest rates. Crime tends to be intra-racial (criminals and victims of the same race) rather than interracial (criminal and victim of different races). About 75% of crime is intra-racial.

• Strangers commit about 60% of violent crimes. However, females are more likely to know their assailants.

• In some studies, over half of offenders report being under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs when they committed the offense resulting in incarceration.

• The characteristics of those most likely to be victimized might be summarized as: young, black, urban, poor and male.

Theories of Victimization

A number of theories have been advanced to explain some of the findings indicated above. Life-style theory, for example, argues that certain life-styles increases one's exposure to criminal offenses and increases risk of victimization, while other life-styles might reduce risk. For example, increased risk would be likely if a person is single, associating with other young men (who are at greater risk for criminal activity), living in urban areas, and going to public places late at night. Reduced risk would be associated with staying home at night, living in a rural area, being married and staying at home, and earning more money. According to this

explanation, the probability of crime depends partially on the activities of the victim. Crime is more likely when victims place themselves in jeopardy.

This explanation would account for some of the findings with respect to victimization. For example, although the elderly are more fearful of crime (perhaps because they are more vulnerable), they go out less and take more precautions when they do. Women also tend to take more precautions, and are more likely to be accompanied be accompanied by a male or a group, rather than alone. Living in an urban area should increase risk, because crime is more common in urban areas and the likelihood of detection is lower.

The Proximity hypothesis suggests that crime is less a function of life-style, but rather is based on close proximity. Victims and criminals live in the same high crime areas, characterized by poor, densely populated, highly transient neighborhoods. The probability of being victimized is more a function of where one lives than one's lifestyle. Proponents of this argument point out that typically criminals do not go far from home to commit their crimes, and thus other people in their own neighborhoods will be more at risk.

A related concept is the equivalent group hypothesis, which points out that criminals and victims overall share similar characteristics because they are not entirely separate groups. People who commit crimes are probably at higher risk for victimization, both because of proximity to other criminals and because of their own lifestyles, which involve going out at night and associating with other young males who are involved in crime. In such associations, they place themselves at risk for becoming the victim of crimes themselves. Some support for this concept comes from research that indicates that crime victims as a group self-report a high amount of criminal activity. This hypothesis does not indicate that all victims are criminals, but that criminals as a group are at higher risk for becoming victims at some point because of the high-risk nature of their activities and associations.

Routine activities theory argues that victimization is dependent on the routine activities of people's daily lives. The volume and distribution of predatory crimes depends on (1) the availability of suitable targets; (2) the absence of capable guardians; and (3) the presence of motivated offenders. In other words, as people move about, there must be opportunities (suitable targets), and it must appear that no one will be present, or that no one will

intervene if they do observe the crime. "Capable guardians" refers to citizens who are watchful and who would take effective action if the saw criminal activity. Of course, even if there were opportunities and no one to observe activity, crime would not occur if they were not motivated to commit a crime.

Routine activities theory accounts for the increase in crime since the 1960s as a function of changes in activities. For example, the traditional neighborhood in the city has declined as many people have left for the suburbs, leaving fewer capable guardians. There are less people at home. Partly this is because more women have entered the workforce rather than staying home, but perhaps more importantly more people have automobiles and more places available for them to go, and simply stay home less. The volume of wealth that can be easily transported has increased. Such changes have meant that there are more opportunities for crime as a function of people's daily routines. Most of Western Europe, Australia, Canada, and the United States have all experienced increases in crime in the latter part of the 20th century, and many of these changes have occurred in these countries.

Victim Services

The development of new programs and legislation has resulted from the study of victims. Such programs have included:

• Victim compensation programs, in which the state pays some of the financial costs of the victim, particularly with respect to violent crime

• Court services, which provide information and assistance to victims

• Crisis intervention and counseling programs for victims, particularly in the case of rape

• Self-protection programs that teach people how to avoid victimization (target hardening) and how to mobilize as a community to prevent victimization (such as neighborhood watch)

There has also been an ongoing debate about victim's rights, and what those rights ought to be. Should relatives of victims be allowed to speak and discuss the impact of the crime at parole hearings or at death penalty hearings? (many states now provide for this measure). Should citizens be

warned when an ex-felon moves into their neighborhood? Some people believe that they should have the right to know and protect themselves. Others believe that the felon has completed his punishment and should be allowed the opportunity to rehabilitate himself without potential harassment from others.

This issue has been particularly debated with respect to "Meghan's Law," a law proposed by the parents of a child murdered by a child molester. The perpetrator had a prior history of molestation, and lived in Meghan's neighborhood. The parents maintained that had they known of his past, they would have taken more precautions. The proposed law, which has been passed in some states, allows neighborhood residents to be informed when a sex offender moves into their neighborhood. There has been controversy because some former offenders have been driven from neighborhoods, and have difficulty finding a place to live--and who have served their sentences. These issues are far from resolution.

CONCEPT OF VICTIMOLOGY

Victimology is the scientific study of victims of crime, a sub discipline of criminology. It seeks to study the relationship between victim and offenders, the persons especially vulnerable to crimes and the victims. Placement in the criminal justice system. (CJS). Benjamin Mendelsohn has done pioneering work in this field. B. Mendelsohn is credited with being the first study to the relationship between victim and doer (offender) and taken together, he termed to else PENAL COUPLE.

Mendelsohn studied victims on the basis of their contributions to crimes and classified them into the following categories.

Completely innocent victims, e.g. Child, Persons in sleep

1. Victims with minor guilt and victims of ignorance such as pregnant women who go to quacks for procuring abortions

2. Voluntary victims, such as the ones who commit suicide or are killed by euthanasia.

3. victims who are more guilty then offenders such as persons who provoke others to commit crimes.

the criminal type of victims who commits offences against others and

get killed or hurt by others in self-defense.

DEFINITION OF VICTIM

The connotations of term ‘victim’ vary in different legal, social, psychological or criminological contexts. The penal codes of the erstwhile USSR describe the victim as follows.

Those who have as a direct result of a crime suffered moral physical or material damage;

1. Those who have suffered physical, moral, or material damage throw and attempted offence;

2. Those whose material damage caused by the crime was made good after the crime, either by the criminal himself or with the help of Militia or of an individual action;

3. Close relation of person who died as a result of a crime.

CHARACTERSTICS OF VICTIMS

Von Henting made the first ever study of the role of victim in crime and found some general characteristics among them which may be summarized as follows;

The poor and ignorant immigrants and those who are requisitive or greedy are the victims of offences involving frauds.

1. Quite often the victims of larcency (theft) are intoxicated or sleeping persons.

The depressed or apathetic person is a victim because he is “deprived of warning posts” and is indifferent harm or injury “in prospect”.

3. Wanton or Sensual persons may become victims due to situations precipitated by themselves.

4. A lonesome and heartbroken person may become especially vulnerable because of the loss of critical faculties in him.

Among “general classes of victims”, Von Hentig includes the young, females, the old, the mentally defective and deranged, the intoxicated immigrants, members of minority groups and the “dull normal”. 

VICTIM AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

One important and basic factor in the administration of criminal justice is the victim’s decision as to whether he should invoke the judicial process. There are a number of motives and factors responsible for the wide gap between the actual volume of the crime and the reports made to the police about it.

Only in the 1940’s did scholarly interest in the criminal-victim relationship develop, although the founders of criminology had been aware of how crucial it was. Hans Von Hentig, Benjamin Mendelsohn, and Henry Ellenberger, the last in his study of the psychological relationship between the criminal and his victims.

It is a parody on the vagaries of the criminal justice systems of the Developing World that inspite of Thirty years of Independence there has been no conceptual study or empirical research regarding the victims of criminal offences.

A movement for the recognition of the modern victim of crime as deserving more effective remedy than the traditional practice of bringing civil suits was begun by the English penal reformer Margery Fry in 1955. Her call for reform was heeded in New Zealand in 1963, when that country’s parliament established the first crime compensation tribunal. This board has discretionary power to award public compensation to the victim or his dependants in the case of certain specified offences. The next year, Great Britain’s Tory government announced a similar but non statuary program. In the United States the first jurisdiction to adopt the compensation principle was California; which enacted its programs in 1965 and put it into operation two years later. Since that time, similar or related programs have been established in some thirty states in the United States and in all the Canadian, provinces. Financial restitution by the offender to the victim represents another development in the legal handling of the victim, in the United States, at least forty normal restitution programs are in operation.

THE VICTIM AS VICTIM OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Students and professionals in the criminal justice system have become increasingly aware that the victim of a criminal often becomes the victim of criminal justice system as well as once the victim reports his victimization to the police-the gateway to the criminal justice system-he routinely faces postponements, delays, rescheduling, and other frustrations. All their means loss of earnings, waste of time, payment of transportation and other expenses, discouragement, and the painful realization that the system does not live up to its ideals and does not serve its constituency, but instead serves only itself. Many believe that the victim is the most disregarded participant in criminal justice proceedings. In practice, after the victim has reported his victimization and provided information to the police, he may not hear from the police or the prosecutor for a long time, if ever, cases are disposed of without any consultation with the victim if and when the victim is called for the trial, he is treated simply as the witness for the state and is subject to long delays, postponements, and other frustrating experiences.

Newly focused attention has brought professional recognition to the victim’s plight at the hands of the criminal justice system: As a result, innovative proposals have been implemented to create victim assistance programmes, to provide the victim with legal and social referral services, to honor his right to be consulted and to offer his opinions when the prosecutor plea bargains with the accused, and to totally revamp the compensation-restitution idea. Some police departments report to victims the progress being made in investigating and solving their cases, and communities may provide such services as rape crisis centers and spouse abuse shelters to assist crime victims by intervening in the crisis and referring the victims to community and others resources in the case of rape, the women’s movement has spurred victimologists-mostly males-to give more equitable and balanced attention to the issues surrounding what some have called “the most despicable but least punished crime.” 

Attention to the victim calls for an examination of the appropriate remedies for victimization. Too often the remedies offered to poor victims reflect middle-class values. The victim’s point of view should be sought when systems are developed for compensating crime victims, and the concept of relative loss should be introduced in debate and deliberations for compensation.

GRIEVANCES AND PROBLEMS OF VICTIMS

The grievances of the victims can be summarized as follows-

1. Inadequacy of the law in allowing the victim to participate in the prosecution in a criminal case instituted on a police report

2. Failure on the part of the police and prosecution to keep the victims informed about progress of the case

3. Inconvenience during interrogation by the police and lengthy court proceeding.

4. Lack of prompt medical assistance to the victims of body offences and victims of accident.

5. Lack of legal assistance to the victim.6. Lack of protection when the victims are threatened by the offender.7. Failure in restitution of victim.

Along with these grievances, the victims of crimes faced multifarious problems: 

I Economic strain of the family

II Change in Social role of dependents.

III Frustration and helplessness leading to suicide.

IV Social stigma.

V Emergence of criminal behavior.

An important aspect of investigating a violent crime is an understanding of the victim and the relation that their lifestyle or personality characteristics may have contributed to the offender choosing them as a victim. Please do not misunderstand the previous statement. In no way are victims being blamed for becoming a victim of a violent crime. Even high risk victims (to be described shortly) have the right to live how they wish without becoming a victim of the type of offenses described on this site. Yet the fact remains, that to understand the offender, one must first understand the victim.

Victims are classified during an investigation in three general categories that describe the level of risk their lifestyle represents in relation to the violent crime that has been committed. The importance of understanding this in an investigation is directly related back to the level of risk to the offender during the commission of the crime. This information is important to the investigation to better understand the sophistication or possible pathology of the offender.

High Risk Victims - Victims in this group have a lifestyle that makes them a higher risk for being a victim of a violent crime. The most obvious high risk victim is the prostitute. Prostitutes place themselves at risk every single time they go to work. Prostitutes are high risk because they will get into a stranger's car, go to secluded areas with strangers, and for the most part attempt to conceal their actions for legal reasons. Offenders often rely on all these factors and specifically target prostitutes because it lowers their chances of becoming a suspect in the crime. Therefore, in this example, the prostitute is a high risk victim creating a lower risk to the offender.

Moderate Risk Victims - Victims that fall into this category are lower risk victims, but for some reason were in a situation that placed them in a greater level of risk. A person that is stranded on a dark, secluded highway due to a flat tire that accepts a ride from a stranger and is then victimized would be a good example of this type of victim level risk.

Low Risk Victims - The lifestyle of these individuals would normally not place them in any degree of risk for becoming a victim of a violent crime. These individuals stay out of trouble, do not have peers that are criminal, are aware of their surroundings and attempt to take precautions to not become a victim. They lock the doors, do not use drugs, and do not go into areas that are dark and secluded.

CONCLUSION

The victim is essentially an inseparable part of crime. Therefore the phenomenon of crime cannot be comprehensively explained without

incorporating the victim of a crime. Crime victim, despite being an integral part of crime and a key factor in criminal justice system, remained a forgotten entity as his status got reduced only to report crime and appear in the court as witness and he routinely faces postponements, delays, rescheduling, and other frustrations. All their means loss of earnings, waste of time, payment of transportation and other expenses, discouragement, and the painful realization that the system does not live up to its ideals and does not serve its constituency, but instead serves only itself. Many believe that the victim is the most disregarded participant in criminal justice proceedings.

It is, therefore, the Indian Higher Courts have started to award the compensation through their writ jurisdiction in appropriate cases.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Aucoin, K. & Beauchamp, D. (2007). Impacts and consequences of victimization, GSS 2004, Canadian

2. Bajpai, G.S. (2006). Psycho-social consequences of victimization in rape. International Perspectives in Victimology , Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 67-81.

3. Bajpai, G.S. (1997). Victim in the Criminal Justice Process , Uppal Publishing House. New Delhi: India

4. Cohen, L. E. & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: a routine activity approach.

5. Government of India. (2002). Report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, Vol.1, Chapter 7.15. pp.143-144.

6. 6. Government of India. (2003). Report on the Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, Vol.1.