Victim Has Right To Participate In Trial But No Right To Be Impleaded In Criminal Revision: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the right to be heard given to a victim or complainant in a criminal case cannot be uplifted to a right to be impleaded in a criminal revision.

Justice Navin Chawla observed the right of the victim to participate in the trial and proceedings is not of a position where the victim replaces the Public Prosecutor.

“The right would remain subordinate to that of the Public Prosecutor and, therefore, where the victim applies for a hearing in a Revision Petition, while the victim must be heard, there is no mandate in law to implead the victim as a party,” the court said.

It added: “…it is to be considered whether a right to be heard given to a victim/complainant in a State case can be uplifted to a right to be impleaded in a criminal revision, if the complainant/victim applies for the same. In my opinion, the answer has to be in the negative.”

The court said though the victim or complainant has a right to be heard in the revision proceedings, such a right does not upscale itself to a right to be impleaded in the said criminal revision.

“The Court while affording a right to be heard to a complainant/victim, shall regulate the same depending on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Court should keep in mind that the criminal prosecution does not turn into a battle between the two private warring parties,” the court said.

It added: “However, at the same time, the Court should also keep in mind that it is eventually the victim who has suffered and has knocked at the doors of Criminal Justice System to seek justice against the alleged crime committed against it.”

Justice Chawla said that a balance has to be struck between the duty or responsibility of the State to conduct the criminal prosecution on behalf of the society as a whole, and the right of the victim or complainant to seek justice for the wrong done to it.

“In achieving this balance, though the victim/complainant may be heard, however, would not have a right to be impleaded, and such hearing shall be regulated by the Court depending on the facts and circumstances of each case,” the court said.

The court was dealing with a plea moved by an entity VLS Finance Limited challenging a trial court order dismissing its applications seeking impleadment and to be heard in all the pending Revision Petitions concerning a cheating case.

The Revision Petitions were filed before the trial court by the accused persons against the order of framing of charges.

Disposing of the plea, Justice Chawla upheld the impugned order insofar as it held that the petitioner entity cannot be impleaded as a party to the Revision Petitions. However, the court said set aside the impugned order insofar as it restricted the right of the petitioner entity only to assisting the Court through the medium of the APP or to plead its case only through the APP.

“The learned ASJ shall afford a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the above-mentioned Revision Petitions pending before it. The petitioner shall also be entitled to file written submissions in the said Revision Petitions,” the court said.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr.Bharat Chugh, Mr.Jai Allagh, Mr.Maanish M. Choudhary, Mr.Ashok Kr. Sharma, Advs

Counsel for Respondents: Mr.Aman Usman, APP for R-1/State; Mr.Vijay Agarwal, Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Mr.Jatin S.Sethi, Advs. for R-2

Title: VLS FINANCE LTD v. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 634

Click here to read order