Karnataka High Court cancels compensation to hostile witness in rape case

The High Court observed that the accused had been acquitted primarily because the victim gave contradictory evidence and failed to support the prosecution during the hearing.

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has ruled that victims who turn hostile and fail to support the prosecution in criminal cases are not entitled to compensation under the government’s victim compensation scheme.

Justice V Srishananda passed the order while allowing a petition filed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority challenging a trial court direction to grant Rs 3 lakh compensation to a rape survivor who had turned hostile during trial proceedings.

The High Court observed that the accused had been acquitted primarily because the victim gave contradictory evidence and failed to support the prosecution during the hearing. In such circumstances, the trial court had no authority to recommend compensation under the victim compensation scheme, the bench said.

The court further noted that district legal services authority chairpersons, who are also principal district and sessions judges, are expected to carefully examine all aspects of a case before recommending compensation. They cannot function merely as a “post office” by mechanically forwarding recommendations, the court remarked.

The bench pointed out that the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority had issued several circulars directing authorities to thoroughly scrutinise cases before making the recommendations. Despite this, the district legal services authority chairperson had recommended compensation without properly considering the facts of the case, the court observed.

Accordingly, the High Court set aside the order granting compensation and held that the survivor in the present case was not eligible for benefits under the compensation scheme.

The case originated from the Huliyaru Police Station limits in Tumakuru district. During the investigation, the survivor had initially recorded statements before police under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code and before a magistrate under Section 164. However, during the trial, she reportedly gave statements contrary to her earlier version.

Based on her hostile testimony, the trial court acquitted the accused. Despite this, the district legal services authority had recommended Rs 3 lakh compensation to the survivor, prompting the state legal services authority to move the High Court challenging the decision.