The Supreme Court is currently considering whether individuals who have been wrongfully arrested, prosecuted, or convicted are entitled to compensation from the state. This issue has come to the forefront due to a plea from a man who spent 12 years in jail after being wrongly convicted of rape and murder. The Supreme Court later acquitted him, citing that the evidence had been fabricated by the police.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta sought assistance from the Attorney General and Solicitor General to help decide the issue, which could have far-reaching implications given India's conviction rate of around 54%. The court noted that many accused are made "scapegoats" by the system and spend years in jail even if later acquitted.
The petitioner, assisted by the Square Circle Clinic of NALSAR University, Hyderabad, argued that his wrongful incarceration amounted to a grave violation of his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. He sought compensation for the violation of his fundamental rights. The plea stated that the state must take responsibility for the misconduct of its officials and pay damages for the harm caused.
Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, appearing for one such victim, argued that people imprisoned for years on false charges must be compensated upon acquittal, as their incarceration violates fundamental rights. He urged the court to frame guidelines on the matter, citing a Law Commission recommendation for a statutory framework for such compensation. The Law Commission had recommended in 2018 that a specific legal framework be enacted to address miscarriages of justice and compensate victims of wrongful conviction.
The court has clubbed this petition with two other similar petitions seeking compensation for wrongful prosecution for a comprehensive hearing. The outcome of this case could mark a major step toward establishing a legal framework for compensating individuals wrongfully deprived of their liberty.
The question of compensating those wrongfully convicted is complex. Supporters of compensation laws argue that incarceration takes a financial, physical, and psychological toll on inmates and that states have an obligation to compensate wrongfully convicted persons for their years of incarceration. Detractors, on the other hand, argue that creating such an obligation may have dangerous or burdensome implications for the state.
Across the globe, there are varying approaches to reparations and compensation for the wrongfully convicted, with some countries and states having compensation laws in place. As of 2019, thirty-five states and the District of Columbia had compensation laws on their books. The Innocence Protection Act provides for compensation of up to $50,000 per year of incarceration for noncapital crimes and twice that for capital crimes. However, many exonerees are not automatically entitled to compensation and must navigate a burdensome legal process to prove their innocence again.
Compensation can take various forms, including direct payments based on years incarcerated, civil rights lawsuits against public officials, or private bills introduced in legislatures. However, many exonerated individuals struggle to receive adequate compensation, and the process can be lengthy and complex.
The Supreme Court's examination of this issue is a significant step toward addressing the long-recognized need for a formal legal framework to compensate those wrongfully convicted in India.
