APP Users: If unable to download, please re-install our APP.
Only logged in User can create notes
Only logged in User can create notes

General Studies 2 >> Governance

audio may take few seconds to load

BLOOD MONEY

BLOOD MONEY

 
 
1. Context
 
The death sentence awarded by a Yemen court to nurse Nimisha Priya from Kerala for murdering her business partner, and the subsequent debates and efforts surrounding her acquittal and repatriation, which involves monetary compensation paid to the victim’s family, have brought the focus back on ‘blood money’ and its implications.
 
2. What is a blood money?
 
 
  • The concept of 'blood money,' also known as 'diya,' originates from Islamic Sharia law and is practiced in countries that integrate these principles into their legal frameworks. According to the doctrine of 'diya,' the perpetrator of a crime is required to compensate the victim or, in cases where the victim has died, their family.
  • This compensation typically involves a specified amount of a valuable asset, often monetary. The practice is most commonly applied in instances of unintentional murder or culpable homicide.
  • It may also be used in murder cases where the victim's family opts against retaliation through 'qisas,' a form of retribution under Sharia law. The primary objective of 'diya' is not to assign a monetary value to human life but to ease the suffering of the victim's family and mitigate their financial hardships.
  • However, even when compensation through 'blood money' is agreed upon, the state and community retain the authority to impose additional punitive measures, including fines or other penalties.
  • In Saudi Arabia, for example, traffic laws mandate the payment of 'blood money' to the heirs of road accident victims, alongside potential imprisonment for the offender. Such cases involve coordination between statutory law and Sharia, with police determining culpability and Sharia courts setting the amount of compensation.
  • Workplace accidents, on the other hand, have predetermined compensation rates decided by a special committee. In 2022, there was discussion about reforming Saudi Arabia's 'blood money' laws to establish equal compensation for men, women, Muslims, and non-Muslims, although these reforms have not yet materialized.
  • Similarly, in Iran, where the practice is stringently followed, 'blood money' varies based on religion and gender, with women's compensation traditionally set at half that of men's.
  • In 2019, the Supreme Court upheld legislation aimed at equalizing 'blood money,' but its comprehensive implementation is still awaited.
  • Pakistan also recognizes the practices of 'diya' and 'qisas,' having incorporated them into its legal system through the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Ordinance of 1991.
  • In Yemen, compensation agreements can be reached between the parties involved, with judicial oversight ensuring fairness in the settlement
 
3. India's stand on 'diya'
 
  • India’s formal legal system does not recognize provisions for granting or receiving ‘blood money.’ However, it includes a mechanism known as ‘plea bargaining,’ which allows the accused to negotiate with the prosecution.
  • Although this concept is not directly comparable to ‘blood money,’ it provides a structured process where the defendant agrees to plead guilty to an offense in exchange for concessions from the prosecutor. These concessions may involve either a reduced charge or a lighter sentence.
  • In cases of charge-related concessions, the accused may plead guilty to a lesser offense or one of several charges, leading to the dismissal of the remaining charges. In sentence-related concessions, the guilty plea can result in a punishment less severe than the one prescribed for the offense in question. Plea bargaining was formally introduced in India through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005, which added Chapter XXI A to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
  • Unlike the broader scope of ‘blood money,’ plea bargaining in India is subject to various restrictions. It applies only to offenses punishable by imprisonment of less than seven years and cannot be used if the accused has a prior conviction for a similar offense.
  • Additionally, it is unavailable for crimes against women, children under the age of 14, heinous offenses like murder or rape, and crimes involving socio-economic issues or civil rights violations. The provision also requires the accused to voluntarily plead guilty without coercion.
  • However, similar to the compensation element in ‘blood money,’ plea bargaining under Section 265E may provide for the victim to receive compensation. Furthermore, just as Islamic countries are exploring ways to make ‘blood money’ more inclusive, discussions in India have also focused on refining the plea bargaining system to enhance its effectiveness.
  • Despite its introduction, the use of plea bargaining in India has been limited. Experts have raised concerns that prolonged trials and judicial delays might compel even innocent accused individuals to plead guilty under this provision, highlighting the need for careful application and reform of the system
 
4. History of Concept 'blood money'
 

Striking parallels to the concept of 'diya' can be found in the historical legal traditions of various cultures worldwide.

In ancient Ireland, the Brehon laws of the seventh century AD outlined systems known as ‘Éraic’ (body price) and ‘Log nEnech’ (honor price). These laws rejected capital punishment as a means of justice, favoring instead the resolution of disputes through compensation. Under Éraic, the amount of compensation was determined by the gravity of the offense, while Log nEnech took the victim’s social status into account when deciding the payment amount.

Similarly, early Welsh law recognized the concept of ‘Galanas,’ which mandated compensation based on the victim's status. In cases of murder, payment of a 'blood fine' was typically obligatory, except when the killing could be justified or excused by specific circumstances. A comparable concept known as ‘Wergeld’ emerged in early medieval Germany. Like 'blood money,' this system formalized compensation for crimes, particularly in cases involving personal harm or death, reflecting similar principles of restitution over retribution

 

Source: The Hindu


Share to Social