Wife Outshines 'Uncle' In 'Closest Legal Heir Test' Under Section 2 (Wa) CrPC: Allahabad High Court
Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that the wife will outshine 'uncle' in 'closest legal heir test' under Section 2 (wa) of Cr.P.C.Section 2(wa) of CrPC defines 'victim' as 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. In...
Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that the wife will outshine 'uncle' in 'closest legal heir test' under Section 2 (wa) of Cr.P.C.
Section 2(wa) of CrPC defines 'victim' as 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.
In writ petitions filed by uncle of the deceased seeking transfer of investigations from Police authorities to CBI, the bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held
“The present petitioner, who is uncle of the deceased, may not come within the purview of victim or legal heir of the deceased, as the wife outshines the uncle in the 'closest legal heir test' to be considered as legal heir in view of Section 2 (wa) of Cr.P.C.”
Observing that closest legal was not defined in any statute, the Court held that
“According to the 'closest legal heir test', the closest or the proximate legal heir of the victim must outshine the next closer legal heir because the administration of justice does not warrant any dispute even on determining as to who would be the 'legal heir' to pursue the grievance of a victim, in pursuing a criminal case, which is fundamentally construed to be an offence against the society and therefore, it is the primary duty of the State to protect the right and interest of the victim.”
One late Ajeet Singh was murdered in 2021. Thereafter, FIRs were lodged against 3 accused persons ad another FIR was lodged against one Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, Senior Journalist of Jan Sandesh and Dhananjay Singh for possessing one secret document allegedly by adopting illegal means. Petitioner, uncle of the deceased, approached the High Court seeking transfer of proceedings from police authorities to the Central Bureau of Investigation on grounds that the senior journalist was influencing the Special Task Force.
The locus standi of the petitioner was challenged on grounds that he was not a victim under Section 2(wa) of CrPC nor was he an affected party. The Court was also informed that the wife of the deceased had filed a similar petition and sought transfer of proceedings to CBI due to the influence of Ex-MP Dhananjay Singh, however, the same was dismissed by the High Court.
Further, the wife had approached the Supreme Court, the matter was remanded back to the High Court and eventually dismissed as withdrawn. The impleadment application by the uncle in one of the writ petitions filed by the wife was also rejected, noted the Court.
Against the rejection of impleadment, the petitioner approached the Apex Court where it was directed to file a writ petition before the High Court. The Court noted that the petitioner filed writ petitions with identical prayers to that of the wife and did not assail the chargesheet.
The Court observed that the petitioner was an uncle of the deceased and even if he was close to the deceased, he could not be placed above the wife in degree of closeness to the deceased. It noted that in explanation under Section 394 of CrPC, 'near relative' means a parent, spouse, lineal descendant, brother or sister and 'legal representative' under Section 320(4) (b) means a person as defined under the CPC.
“This Court finds that as per Section 2 (11) of the Civil Procedure Code, defines 'legal representative' to be a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, which brings the schedule incorporated as per Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 appended to the said Act relating to 'Class-I' and 'Class-II' heir into limelight. Interestingly, in both the cases, this Court finds that Uncle is a far away and/or distant relative and in a way does not find any place both under the meaning of the word 'near relative' or 'legal representative' mentioned in the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
Accordingly, the Court defined 'closest legal heir test' as when the closest proximate heir of the deceased outshines the next closest heir. Consequently, it held that the wife outshines the uncle as the closest legal heir as she closer to the deceased in the pedigree of legal heirs. It further held that the writ petition could not be entertained without any NOC/ authorization from the wife.
“The order of transfer of investigation could have been passed when the Court finds that there is new material or evidence of sterling nature, which has been ignored by the investigating agency but in the present case, no such material or evidence has been shown to the Court and only apprehension has been shown to the effect that the main mastermind and allegedly the person to be instrumental in the said crime, who allegedly planned the murder of late Ajeet Singh is having close association with STF, the investigating agency, therefore, such investigation is not proper.”
Noting that the prayers were highly stale and liberty to challenge the chargesheets was not exercised by the wife, the Court held petitioner was not a victim under Section 2(wa) of CrPC and did not have the locus standi to seek transfer of proceedings.
Case Title: Rajesh Singh Versus State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No.4791 of 2025]