Compensation And Restorative Justice: Integrating Community Based Approaches
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 9, 2025
- 2 min read
Goran Chawla, LL.M. (Master of Laws), University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University, Mohali, Punjab, India.
Dr. Aditya Karwasra, Assistant Professor, University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University, Mohali, Punjab, India
ABSTRACT
This study examines compensation and restorative justice within India’s evolving criminal process by connecting statutory mandates to community- based practices that repair harm. It situates compensation under “Section 395 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita” as the successor to “Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973”, and the state-led “victim compensation scheme” under “Section 396 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita” as the successor to “Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973”. It explains how these shifts preserve the compensatory architecture while sharpening duties of courts and legal services authorities. It also maps enabling provisions that support restorative outcomes, including “Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita” on compounding of offences, plea bargaining under Chapter XXIII of the BNSS, and “Section 397 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita” on free medical treatment for specified victims. These legal elements align with community-centric forums such as Lok Adalats under “Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987” and community mediation signposted by the “Mediation Act, 2023”. The abstract then distills key case law on compensation and victim-centric relief, including “Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India, “Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, “Ankush Shivaji Gaikwad v. State of Maharashtra, “Laxmi v. Union of India, “Suresh v. State of Haryana, the “Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, line of orders, a Delhi High Court ruling on the prospectivity of the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme, and a Supreme Court decision dated 9 May 2024 that reaffirmed the duty to record reasons on compensation. The abstract concludes that statutory continuity, structured judicial guidance, and community-based resolution can be integrated through a practical roadmap that standardizes compensation triggers, harnesses Lok Adalat and community mediation for supervised restitution, and links community service under the “Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita” to victim or community- defined repair. This integration reduces adversarial deadlock and strengthens a reparative public law response.
Keywords Restorative justice; Victim compensation; BNSS 2023; Community mediation; Lok Adalat; NALSA scheme; Case law; Community service; Juvenile justice.
