'Victim' U/S 2(wa) CrPC Includes Legal Heirs Who May Continue Criminal Case If Victim Dies: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has said that the word 'victim' under Section 2(wa) of CrPC would include his or her legal heirs and they would have the locus to continue the criminal case in case of victim's death, before Police files the chargesheet. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said,"A victim would mean a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the...
The Karnataka High Court has said that the word 'victim' under Section 2(wa) of CrPC would include his or her legal heirs and they would have the locus to continue the criminal case in case of victim's death, before Police files the chargesheet.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said,
"A victim would mean a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused person has been charged and the expression 'victim' includes his or her guardian or legal heir."
It added, "A genuine victim is to be permitted to come on record and the definition of 'victim' as found in Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C. cannot be rendered a restrictive meaning and has to be liberally construed...The cause (complaint filed by deceased person) continues and the legal heir who has stepped into the shoes of the complainant is entitled to agitate the cause brought up by the complainant."
It thus answered the question- whether locus is alien to criminal jurisprudence- in the negative.
The observations comes in a quashing petition filed by company Scania Commercial Vehicles, its Managing Director and others against proceedings arising out of a complaint registered under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 34 of the IPC.
The complaint was lodged by 2nd respondent (now deceased), proprietor of SRS Travels, alleging that the company sold him defective buses and he was saddled with numerous problems in the operation and maintenance of vehicles which led to huge financial losses and the goodwill.
The High Court had stayed all proceedings in the matter and during the pendency of the subject petition, the 2nd respondent died. An application was then filed by his legal representative, his daughter, seeking to come on record and prosecute the case further. Objections were filed by the petitioners contending that the legal representative of an informant has no personal right to come on record.
The bench observed that the complaint against the petitioners was registered on account of huge losses suffered by the complainant. Being the legal representative of the complainant, those losses would stand transferred to his daughter.
"Even on a restrictive meaning of the word 'victim', in the peculiar facts of this case, the legal heir of the complainant, has to be permitted to come on record, as the matter is still at the stage of investigation and the police have not yet filed the charge sheet," Court said.
Rejecting the contention of the petitioners that the cause is dead with the death of the complainant, the bench said, "The legal heir who has stepped into the shoes of the complainant is entitled to agitate the cause brought up by the complainant."
It then allowed the application filed by the legal heir of the deceased complainant and directed the petitioners to implead her as party in the petition.
Case Title: SCANIA COMMERCIAL VEHICLES INDIA PVT. LTD & others v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & others.
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.2778 OF 2020
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 457
Date of Order: 3 SEPTEMBER, 2022
Appearance: C.V.NAGESH, SR.ADVOCATE A/W SHWETHA RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE for petitioners; K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1; SANDESH J.CHOUTA, SR.ADVOCATE FOR ISMAIL M.MUSBA, ADVOCATE FOR R2.