Let accused pay up if victim wants: SC

The Supreme Court, dealing with two vital criminal jurisprudence questions, in rulings considered unconventional by existing legal standards, held that in a case where punishment with a jail term cannot mitigate the suffering of a victim in economic offences, the accused could be asked to pay compensation to ensure “total justice”.

On the second question, on eyewitnesses in murder cases, the court held that the testimony of witnesses who are close relatives of the victim cannot be “discarded” merely because they might testify against the accused in revenge to ensure he gets harsher punishment.

Answering these questions in two separate judgments, a bench of Justices P. Sathasivam and H.L. Dattu said: “Sometimes the situation becomes such that no purpose is served by keeping a person behind bars. Instead, directing the accused to pay ... compensation to the victim can ensure delivery of total justice.”

The only condition while invoking Section 357(3) CrPC was to see if the accused was in a position to pay compensation. This section empowers courts to impose adequate compensation on the accused for an offence which causes financial loss to the victim.

The bench felt that sending the accused to jail in such cases would be of no help to the victim.

Court to hear Satyam cases on April 21, 29

Special court for economic offences on Friday posted six cases filed by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) against former directors of Satyam Computer Services Limited in the multi-crore accounting scam to April 29 and the remaining one case to April 21.

The court ordered the investigation agency to produce all original documents seized by it in the court.

The counsel for SFIO requested the court for some time as all the original documents are in New Delhi following which the court directed to produce all originals on April 21.

The SFIO has filed seven cases in the court against 11 former directors and officials of Satyam Computers for alleged violation of company laws under various sections of the Companies Act 1956.