CRIMINAL LAW (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2013 AND VICTIM

____________________________________________
Criminology, Penology, Victimology

Submitted by
Shashank Shekhar
Semester V Roll No 56 Class of 2017-22
Faculty of Law
Jamia Millia Islamia.

In
October, 2019

Under the guidance of

Mr. Rasheed CA

Assistent Professor
Faculty of Law,
Jamia Millia Islamia (Central University),
New Delhi-110025
 CERTIFICATE

The project entitled “Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013

and Victim” submitted to the Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia
Islamia for Criminology, Penology, Victimology as part of
Internal Assessment is based on my original work carried out
under the guidance of Mr. Rasheed CA from 01 August 2019 to
30 October 2019 . The Research work has not been submitted
elsewhere for award of any degree.

The material borrowed from other sources and incorporated in

the research paper has been duly acknowledged.

I understand that I myself would be held responsible and

accountable for plagiarism, if any, detected later on.

Signature of the Candidate : Shashank Shekhar

Date: 30th October 2019.

 I. Introduction

The Criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2013 (CLAA, 2013) is a fine example where
the law is amended in response to the reactions of the society. The protests erupted
post Delhi gang rape incident has led to the promulgation of the Criminal Law
(Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 which was superseded by the enactment of
Criminal law (Amendment) Act in March 2013. Coincidently, during the same
period in 2012 the Government has introduced a Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill
in the Lok Sabha to bring reforms in rape law. The protests against Delhi gang
rape has added to the longstanding demand for reform which has resulted in the
setting up of a Committee under the Chairmanship of former Chief Justice J.S.
Verma (Committee).1 The mandate of the Committee was to review existing laws
and suggest amendments to criminal law to effectively deal with instances of
offences against women. The Committee recommended for creation of new
offences, amendment in existing offences and enhanced procedural safeguards to
female victims.

The object was to bring in more deterrence so as to prevent criminals from

committing such gruesome crimes. At the same time the aim was also to protect
the victims by bringing more safeguards in both substantive and procedural
criminal law. In a way CLAA, 2013 was enacted to serve the needs of female
victims. Most of the reforms were related to cases of acid attack and sexual
assault.

This Project will focus only on amendments made in the interest of victims which
either confer more rights or provide safeguards to crime victims.

II. Position of Victim Prior to CLAA, 2013

In the aftermath of UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of

Crime and Abuse of Power, 1985 the crime victims have started gaining attention
of both judiciary and law makers. The legislature has introduced many victim
centric provisions in the substantive and procedural criminal laws whereas the
judiciary is consistently attempting to enforce that victims of crime should be
1
Report of the Committee on Amendments to Criminal Law,
http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Justice%20verma%20committee/js
%25 0verma%20committe%20report.p df
 recognised as a prime stakeholder in the criminal justice system. The set of
amendments brought before CLAA, 2013 have dealt with issues of crime victims
in general and with those of woman and child victims.

III. CLAA, 2013 and Victims of crime:

As mentioned above, the primary focus of CLAA, 2013 was to address concerns
of public at large towards the increasing incidents against women. The entire
effort of Justice Verma Committee was also to bring reforms in the existing
framework of law. The Committee has proposed many changes but not all were
incorporated in the CLAA, 2013. The changes which are introduced by the CLAA,
2013 and relevant to crime victims can be discussed under the following heads:

Pre-Trial Stage:

1. Reporting of Crime

2. Recording of Statement

3. Identification Process.

Reporting of Crime

Under-reporting of crime is a serious challenge in our country. Sometimes victim

may choose not to report the incident to police whereas in other cases where
victim prefers to report the crime, the police may choose not to register the same.
These ‘dark figures’ never come to light and the National Crime Records Bureau
(NCRB) statistics only show understated crime rates. It also reflects in imbalance
between prevalence of crime and its reporting in any region. Therefore, it was
necessary to provide a trustworthy system which may encourage victims to come
forward and report the crime.

The CLAA, 2013has introduced two significant changes in this regard. First, a
proviso to section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code) was added
which required recording of information, given by the victim disclosing either
commission or attempt to commit offence in the nature of acid attack or sexual
assault, preferably by a woman police officer and in case no woman police officer
is available then by any woman officer.2

The second proviso to section 154 has attempted to facilitate victims who are
permanently or temporarily mentally or physically disabled in matters of reporting

of crime. Therefore, where a crime of acid attack or sexual assault is attempted or

committed against a woman who is temporarily or permanently mentally or
physically disabled, the information regarding such crime shall be recorded by a
police officer i) at her residence, or ii) at a place of her choice. Such information
shall be recorded in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator. The
recording of such information shall be videographed.3

Secondly, a corresponding amendment was made in the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
whereby section 166A was added. Section 166A(c) obliges every police officer to
immediately register first information report (FIR) in cases where the information
discloses commission of a cognizable offence in the nature of acid attack or sexual
assault. Non-recording or refusal to record such information shall attract criminal
sanction and the police officer shall be liable for punishment under section 166A
IPC.4
2
See, first proviso to section 154 of the Code- Provided that if the information
is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 326A, section
326B, section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D,
section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section
376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been
committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman
police officer or any woman officer
3
See, second proviso to section 154 of the Code- Provided further that—

in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354, section 354A, section
354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C,
section 376D, section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been
committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then
such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to
report such offence or at a convenient place of such person’s choice, in the presence of an
interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;

4
Section 166A(c) of the IPC- (c) Whoever, being a public servant fails to
record any information given to him under sub-section (1) of section 154 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in relation to cognizable offence
punishable under section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354B,
section 370, section 370A, section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section
376C, section 376D, section 376E or section 509, shall be punished with
The subsequent decision in Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P.5 has also confirmed
that police has no discretion but to register FIR if the information discloses
commission of a cognizable offence.

Both the CLAA, 2013 and the decision in Lalita Kumari have attempted to
streamline the process of crime reporting by making the process victim friendly
and police more accountable.

Recording of Statement
Following the observations of the Supreme Court in Nandini Satpathy v. PL
Dani6 section 160 of the Code was already amended to the effect that no woman
shall be required to attend at any place other than the place where she resides. The
CLAA has effected further change in the process of requiring attendance and
expanded such protection even to a person who is mentally or physically disabled.

As far as recording of statement is concerned sub clause (3) to section 161 was
inserted which required recording of statement of a woman victim of acid attack or
sexual assault by a woman police officer or by any woman officer.7

Similarly sub section 5A was added to section 164 which provided for recording
of statement of a victim of an offence of acid attack or sexual assault by a Judicial
Magistrate soon after the commission of such crime is brought to the notice of the
police officer. The duty of the police officer to get such statement recorded by the
Judicial Magistrate is provided under sub-clause (3) of the proviso to section 154
of the Code. The Magistrate shall take assistance of interpreter or special educator
if the victim making statement is temporarily or permanently mentally or
rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but
which may extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine
5
(2014) 2 SCC 1
6
(1978) 2 SCC424
7
Proviso to section 161(3) of the Code- Provided further that the statement of
a woman against whom an offence under section 354, section 354A, section
354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376B,
section 376C, section 376D, section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal
Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted shall be recorded, by a
woman police officer or any woman officer.
 physically disabled. In such cases the recording of statement must be
videographed.

The CLAA, 2013 has facilitated the disabled persons even in cases of
identification of arrested person. Proviso to section 54A provides that where the
person identifying the arrested person is mentally or physically disabled, such
process of identification shall take place under the supervision of a Judicial
Magistrate. The Judicial Magistrate shall take appropriate measures to ensure that
the methods of identification are designed keeping in view the needs of such
person. In all such cases the process of identification shall be videographed.8

During Trial:

Examination of Witness/Victim:

The CLAA, 2013 has extended protection to victims of sexual assault at the trial
stage by bringing significant changes in the Code. One such amendment is made
in section 273 in matters of recording of statement of a rape victim.

8
Proviso to section 54A of the Code- Provided that, if the person identifying the person arrested is
mentally or physically disabled, such process of identification shall take place under the
supervision of a Judicial Magistrate who shall take appropriate steps to ensure that such person
identifies the person arrested using methods that person is comfortable with:

Provided further that if the person identifying the person arrested is mentally or physically
disabled, the identification process shall be videographed.
Way back in 2004 in the case of Sakshi v. Union of India9 the Supreme Court has
observed that the victims of rape should be provided with comfortable atmosphere
to make them depose the entire incident with ease. They should not feel fear or
embarrassed. In this regard the Court has issued following directions for the
protection of victims of child sexual abuse:

“A screen or shield kind of arrangement may be made to avoid face to

face contact between the victim/witnesses and the accused;

In cross-examination questions which are directly linked to the incident

must be given in writing to the Judge who may put them to the victim
or witnesses in a language clear and non embarrassing in nature;

Victims of child sexual abuse, while giving testimony in court, should

be allowed sufficient breaks as and when required.”10

These directions were in addition to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in
the case of State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh11 where the Court has given
direction to invariably conduct rape trials in camera as per section 327(2) of the
Code.12

The proviso added to section 273 was to give statutory recognition to the
directions given in Sakshi case. The proviso casts a duty on presiding officers to
take appropriate measures to avoid any confrontation between the accused and the
victims of child sexual abuse (who are below the age of eighteen years). 13 As

9
(2004)5SCC518
10
Para 34.
11
1996 SCC (2) 384
12
Section 327(2) of the Code- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (1), the inquiry into and trial of rape or an offence under section 376,
section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D or section 376E of
the Indian Penal Code shall be conducted in camera.
13
Section 273 proviso of the Code- Provided that where the evidence of a
woman below the age of eighteen years who is alleged to have been subjected
to rape or any other sexual offence, is to be recorded, the court may take
appropriate measures to ensure that such woman is not confronted by the
 provided in the Sakshi case such face off may be avoided by using a screen or
shield which will also ensure that the accused can effectively exercise his right to
cross-examination.

Dignified Treatment to victim/Witness:

The rape law has undergone many changes post Mathura case.14The Criminal Law
(Amendment) Act, 1983 has added section 114A to the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
(Act) which has enabled a court to raise a presumption that the victim of rape had
not consented and that that the offence was committed against her will. 15 The
burden of proving ‘consent’ was imposed upon the accused. The amendment was
an outcome of the ‘open letter’ written by four professors to the Chief Justice of
India criticising the judgment in Mathura case on the issue of ‘consent’.

It took another 20 years to repeal equally degrading and discriminatory provision

on admission of past sexual history of the rape victim i.e. section 155(4) of the Act
which had provided that ‘when a man is prosecuted for rape or an attempt to rape
or attempt to ravish it may be shown that the prosecutrix was of generally immoral
character’. Sadly, even after deletion of this clause there have been instances
where past sexual history of the victim has been considered and gone against the
victim. The CLAA, 2013 has further strengthened the position by adding section
53A in the Act and clarified that the evidence of character and past sexual history
of the victim shall not be relevant in a rape trial to decide the question of
‘consent’16

accused while at the same time ensuring the right of cross-examination of the
accused.
14
Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1979 SC185. Read also Pratap
Mishra v State of Orissa, AIR 1977 SC1307 and State of Punjab v. Gurmit
Singh (1996)2SCC384
15
Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Shubra Chakraborty, 1996 SCC (1) 490
16
Section 53A IEA- In a prosecution for an offence under section 354, section 354A, section
354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C,
Speed Trial

To afford speedy trial in rape cases the CLAA, 2013 has brought change in section
309 of the Code. Section 309 provides that where an inquiry or trial is related to
rape cases, the same must be completed within a period of two months. Earlier this
period of two months was to be counted from the date of commencement of the
examination of witnesses but after the 2013 amendment the period of two months
to be counted from the date of filing of the charge sheet.

Compensation:

Section 357A requires every state to prepare Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS)
for the award of compensation to crime victims. Many states have prepared VCS
to fulfil the requirement under section 357A which contain amount of
compensation depending upon nature of offence.17 It has been noticed that there is
disparity in amount of compensation for similar crimes among VCS prepared by
different states. Therefore the central government has established a Central Victim
Compensation Fund (CVCF) to support and supplement the state VCS and to
reduce the disparity in quantum of compensation amount. 18 The CVCF has fixed a
minimum amount of rupees 3 lakhs as compensation for the offence of rape and
acid attack. Whereas for other types of sexual assault excluding rape the quantum
of compensation is fixed as fifty thousand rupees. Where the victim of sexual
assault is less than 15 years of age the compensation amount shall be increased by
section 376D or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code or for attempt to commit any such
offence, where the question of consent is in issue,

evidence of the character of the victim or of such person’s previous sexual experience with any
person shall not be relevant on the issue of such consent or the quality of consent

17
Victim Compensation Schemes prepared by various states
http://mha1.nic.in/par2013/AnnexLSQNo203For220714.PDF

18
Central Victim Compensation Fund

http://mha.nic.in/sites/upload_files/mha/files/CVCFFuideliness_141015.pdf
50%.

Even before the CVCF guidelines came, the Supreme Court in Laxmi v. Union of
India19 (Laxmi I) attempted to remove the disparity in quantum of amount of
compensation fixed for acid attack. The Court has noticed that the amount of
compensation provided for the acid attack in different VCS is neither uniform nor
adequate. Keeping that the acid attack victim has to undergo a series of surgery
and corrective treatments the quantum of compensation must be enhanced to
minimum 3 lakhs rupees as the after care and rehabilitation cost. The Court further
directed that “a sum of rupees 1 lakh shall be paid to acid attack victim within 15
days of occurrence of such crime to facilitate immediate medical attention and
expenses in this regard. The balance sum of 2 lakhs shall be paid as expeditiously
20
as may be possible and positively within two months thereafter.” The Court has
clarified that it has set the minimum amount for compensation and the state at its
discretion may award more compensation to the victim of acid attack.21 The
CLAA, 2013 has added section 357B to clarify that the compensation to be
awarded by the state under VCS shall be in addition to the payment of fine to the
victim under section 326A or section 376D of the IPC.22

IV. Treatment of Victim:

Another notable change brought by the CLAA, 2013 is in the form of extending
health services to victims of acid attack and sexual assault. The newly added

19
(2014) 4 SCC 427.

20
Id. at Para 12.

21
This view was confirmed by the later Bench in the case of Parivartan Kendra v. Union
of India Writ Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2013 decided on December 07, 2015.

22
Section 357B of the Code- The compensation payable by the State
Government under section 357A shall be in addition to the payment of fine to
the victim under section 326A or section 3760 of the Indian Penal Code.
section 357C obliges all hospitals, public or private, to provide immediate first aid
and medical treatment free of cost to a victim of rape or acid attack.23

In Laxmi v. Union of India24(Laxmi II) the Supreme Court interpreted the

meaning of the terms ‘first aid’ and ‘medical treatment’ as appeared in section
357C of the Code. The Court was of the opinion that free medical treatment is not
limited to physical treatment to the victim of acid attack but also include
availability of medicines, bed and food in the concerned hospital. The Court has
issued following directions:

“The private hospitals should not refuse treatment to victims of acid attack.

The hospital shall provide full medical treatment to acid attack victims
including medicines, food, bedding and reconstructive surgeries.

The hospital which first treated the acid attack victim should issue a
certificate confirming that the individual is a victim of an acid attack.

The victim may utilise this certificate for treatment and reconstructive
surgeries or to avail any other government scheme that the victim may be
entitled.”25

A corresponding amendment was made in the IPC with an aim to provide effective
implementation of section 357C of the Code. Section 166B of IPC prescribes
punishment for those who refuses to treat a victim falling under section 357C of

23
Section 357C of the Code- All hospitals, public or private, whether run by the Central
Government, the State

Government, local bodies or any other person, shall immediately, provide the first-aid or medical
treatment, free of cost, to the victims of any offence covered under section 326A, 376,376A, 376B,
376C, 3760 or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code, and shall immediately inform the police of
such incident.

24
Writ Petition (Crl.) No.129 of 2006 Decided on April 10, 2015
25
Id. at Para 17-18
 the Code.26

V. Summary

It can be seen from the preceding discussion that the CLAA, 2013, like its
predecessors, has also attempted to widen the reach of law to cover issues of crime
victims. On the one hand, the CLAA, 2013 has redefined offence of rape, created
new offences like acid attack, stalking, voyeurism etc., and imposed enhanced
punishment for these crimes; on the other hand it has expanded the regime of
procedural safeguards in the matters of crime reporting, trial, assistance,
compensation etc. The judiciary has also extended its full support in enforcing the
rights of crime victims and taken liberal approach in deciding matters of
compensation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Books:

26
Section 166B of the IPC- Whoever, being in charge of a hospital, public or private, whether run
by the Central Government, the State Government, local bodies or any other person, contravenes
the provisions of section 357C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.
  Leila Seth, Talking of Justice: People’s Rights in Modern India, Aleph Book
Company, 2014

 Dr. Mrinal Satish, Discretion, Discrimination and the Rule of Law:

Reforming Rape Sentencing in India, Cambridge University Press
(2016).

Article:

 Mrinal Satish and Shwetasree Majumder, A Brief Synopsis of the

new offences/procedures recommended by the Justice Verma
Committee on amendments to Criminal Law 1 J. Nat’l L. U. Delhi
172 (2013).

Report;

 Report of Justice JS Verma Committee on Amendments to Criminal Law

Cases;

 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2014)2SCC1.

 Nandini Satpathy v. PL Dani (1978)2SCC424.

 Sakshi v. Union of India (2004)5SCC518.

 State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh 1996 SCC (2) 384.

 Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1979 SC185.

 Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Shubra Chakraborty, 1996 SCC (1) 490.

 Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) 4 SCC 427.

 Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India Writ Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2013.

 Laxmi v. Union of India Writ Petition (Crl.) No.129 of 2006 (2015).

………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………