Should India have a statutory mechanism to compensate people who are wrongfully prosecuted? Discuss with reference to the Law Commission's recommendations.

In November 2026, a UAPA court at Sopore acquitted two youths after six years in custody. It held that "suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute proof" [1]. Yet the MHA has told Parliament that there is no provision to compensate persons acquitted under UAPA [2]. A statutory remedy is overdue.

Why a statutory mechanism is needed

• Article 21: years of custody followed by acquittal is punishment without conviction. This is "process as punishment".
• Remedy gap: relief now depends on occasional writ-court awards or slow civil suits for malicious prosecution. No legislative framework gives relief as of right [3].
• Accountability: the risk of paying compensation would push agencies to investigate carefully before arresting.
• Social cost: lost education, jobs and reputation. In conflict zones like J&K, wrongful prosecution deepens alienation.

Law Commission's 277th Report (2018) The Delhi High Court prompted the report in Babloo Chauhan. The Commission recommended [3]:

• treating wrongful or malicious prosecution as a miscarriage of justice, whether or not it led to conviction or detention
• special courts in each district, using summary procedures
• the claimant to prove the case on the balance of probabilities
• money and non-money help: counselling, mental-health care, vocational training
• amounts based on detention length, harm to health and reputation, and lost opportunities
• removing disqualifications for jobs and education
• a draft CrPC (Amendment) Bill, 2018

Concerns

• The Commission's model requires proof of misconduct. An acquittal on "benefit of doubt", as at Sopore, may not qualify [1][3].
• The government argues that UAPA's built-in safeguards already prevent misuse [2]. Others fear the cost to the exchequer, frivolous claims and over-cautious policing.

Way forward

• The CrPC has been replaced, so write the Commission's draft into the BNSS.
• Use a tiered design: a fixed minimum award for long undertrial detention ending in acquittal, and higher awards where misconduct is proved.
• Have NCRB record how long acquitted persons spent in custody, and enforce video-recorded searches.

A statutory remedy would turn compensation from a discretionary favour into an enforceable right. A carefully tiered law built on the Law Commission's framework can protect both security and liberty. That would give real meaning to Article 21 and to SDG 16's goal of access to justice for all.