Blood Money

17.01.2025

Blood Money

Why in the news?                        

The death sentence awarded by a Yemen court to a nurse from Kerala, 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.

About Blood Money:

• Blood money’, or ‘diya’, finds footing in the Islamic Sharia law and is followed in countries that incorporate these laws in their legislation.
• Under the rule of ‘diya’, a select quantity of a valuable asset, primarily monetary, has to be paid by the perpetrator of the crime to the victim or the victim’s family if the latter has died.
• The custom is practised predominantly in cases involving unintentional murder and culpable homicide.
• It is also invoked in murder cases wherein the victim’s kin choose not to retaliate through ‘qisas’ (a way of retribution under the Sharia).
• The end-goal, as the law says, is not to put a price tag on human life but to alleviate the plight and suffering of the affected family and their potential loss of income.
• However, it is to be noted that even if the concerned parties reconcile through ‘blood money’, the community and the state will retain the right to impose a deterrent punishment, including penalties.
• In its contemporary applications, ‘blood money’ is upheld in several Islamic countries with factors such as gender, religion, and nationality of the victim coming into play.
• In Saudi Arabia, for instance, the traffic regulations specifically mandate payment of ‘blood money’ to heirs of the victims who die in road accidents. In addition, the perpetrator shall be liable to a prison term.

What’s India’s stand on ‘diya’?

• Provisions for the grant or receiving of ‘blood money’ do not find a place in India’s formal legal system.
• However, the system does provide a way for the accused to negotiate with the prosecution through ‘plea bargaining’.
• Though the concept cannot be directly equated with ‘blood money’, the scheme lays out a procedure whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty for a particular offence perpetrated by the accused in return for a concession from the prosecutor.
• Introduced through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005, plea bargaining comes with an array of limitations unlike ‘blood money’, which has a broader purview.
• For instance, plea bargaining can be taken up only for offences that are penalised with imprisonment of less than seven years.
• It cannot be invoked if the accused has been previously convicted for a similar offence.
• Besides, the provision is not available for crimes against women or children aged below 14; heinous crimes such as murder or rape; and offences involving socio-economic conditions, including civil rights.
• Moreover, the accused has to voluntarily come forward to plead guilty, and must not be coerced.
• However, on the lines of ‘blood money’, plea bargaining may also allow for the victim to receive compensation.

                                                                Source: The Hindu

With reference to Blood Money, consider the following statements:

1. The primary purpose of Blood Money is to exempt the perpetrator from any legal punishment.

2. It is practised predominantly in cases involving unintentional murder and culpable homicide.

3. Provisions for the grant or receiving of ‘blood money’ do not find a place in India’s formal legal system.

How many of the statements given above are correct?

A.Only one

B.Only two

C.All three

D.None

Answer B