Sakunjay Vyas
Published on: April 19, 2022 at 08:56 IST
The three Judge Bench of Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli of the Supreme Court overturned the impugned judgment passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, whereby Respondent, has been enlarged on bail in a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326 read with Sections 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as Sections 3, 25 and 30 of the Arms Act,1959.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that from the investigative stage to appeal/revision period, the victim is entitled to be heard at every stage.
The three Judge Bench of Chief Justice of India, N.V. Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli was hearing an appeal against the impugned judgment passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench whereby Respondent, has been enlarged on bail in a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326 read with Sections 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as Sections 3, 25 and 30 of the Arms Act,1959.
The Bench, while hearing the plea seeking cancellation of bail, identified the issue in hand to be, Whether a Victim defined under CrPC is entitltled to be heard at the the stage of adjudication of bail application of an accused?
“Whether a ‘victim’ as defined under Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, “Cr.P.C.”) is entitled to be heard at the stage of adjudication of bail application of an accused?” The Court said.
The Apex Court after analyzing the facts and evidence in hand considered these two points to be taken into account:
- That India’s evolving criminal law jurisprudence recognizes the right of victims to have their voices heard, especially in cases involving heinous crimes.
- That whenever victims come forward and willingly participate in a criminal trial, they should be the provided with an opportunity to be heard fairly and effectively.
The Apex Court stated that the rights of the victim are being looked into over the years and the same has expanded to a certain level. Now the proceedings are not just between the accused and the State. With time, the jurisprudence of victims’ rights to be heard has evolved, as well as their capacity to participate in criminal proceedings.
The Apex Court further mentioned certain movements and acts made for the strengthening of victim’s right in adjudication proceedings. These pieces of legislation have enlarged scope of participation as well as expanded the ambit of rights of the victims, they are:
- The pro-victim movement, the Bench notes, was augmented by the adoption of the UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for the Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, 1985 by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 40/34.
- Victims Crime Act, 1984, Victims’ Rights and Restitution Act, 1990 were enacted by the United States of America to grant legal assistance to the crime-victims.
- Australia enacted South Australian Victims of Crime Act, 2001 and
- Canada enacted the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.
The Apex Court stated that under the 154th Report, the Law Commission of India discussed compensatory justice for victims as part of a compensation scheme.
That in a 2003’s report of the Committee on Reforms of the Criminal Justice System, recommendations were made to develop a framework that would integrate the criminal justice system while restoring the confidence of the people.
That the Apex Court stated that that a ‘victim’ as defined under Section 2(wa) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure. Every stage following the commission of the offence, including the stage of adjudication of bail applications, the accused has a right to be heard.
“A ‘victim’ within the meaning of Cr.P.C. cannot be asked to await the commencement of trial for asserting his/her right to participate in the proceedings. He/She has a legally vested right to be heard at every step post the occurrence of an offence. Such a ‘victim’ has unbridled participatory rights from the stage of investigation till the culmination of the proceedings in an appeal or revision“, the Court said.
The Apex Court further stated that whenever victims come forward and willingly participate in a criminal trial, they should be the provided with an opportunity to be heard fairly and effectively.
“If the right to file an appeal against acquittal, is not accompanied with the right to be heard at the time of deciding a bail application, the same may result in grave miscarriage of justice.” The Court said
As a result, the Apex Court overturned the impugned judgment passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for the fresh consideration of the bail application by stating that the High Court shall decide the bail application afresh expeditiously, and preferably within a period of three months.
