Deceased Victim's Legal Heirs Fall Under Ambit Of Section 2(wa) CrPC, Entitled To Continue Appeal Against Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan High Court has held that legal representatives/heirs of the victim fall under the ambit of the term “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC, and thus have the right to continue prosecution against the accused in the event of the victim's death.The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand further observed that while many amendments were made in favour of the victim, giving them right to file appeal under section 372, CrCP against acquittal or conviction for lesser offence, legislature had forgotten to amend the proviso to Section 394, CrPC that dealt with abatement of appeals.It said that Section 2(wa) CrPC defines 'victim' in plain and simple language 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...'. The court said that it was clear that Section 2(wa) "thoughtfully accorded an expansive understanding to the term 'victim' and not a narrow or restricted meaning". Referring to various judgments of the Supreme Court, the court said that it can safely be held that as per Section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C., the legal representative/heir of the 'victim' fall under the definition of 'victim'. "Before parting with this order, this Court feels it appropriate to observe that the legislature has brought various amendments in favour of the 'victim' while amending the definition of the word 'victim' and giving him/her the right to file appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C., against the judgment of acquittal of the accused or in case of conviction for lesser offence or imposition of inadequate compensation. The definition of 'victim' includes his/her guardian and legal representative/heir as well. Section 2(wa) and Section 372 of Cr.P.C. were brought in picture and effect vide Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008 (Act No. 5 of 2009) w.e.f. 31.12.2009. Prior to this amendment, no such right to file appeal was given to the victim.It appears that while making these amendments in favour of the victim, in the year 2008/2009, the legislature has forgotten to amend the provisio attached to Section 394 Cr.P.C., which deals with the abatement of appeals". The court said that Section 394(1) and (2) Cr.P.C. state that every appeal, other than the appeal under Chapter XXIX Cr.P.C. (except an appeal from a sentence of fine), shall finally abate on the death of the appellant. For context, Section 394(1) and (2) states that every appeal, other than appeal under Chapter XXIX stood abated on death of the appellant. However, a proviso to Section 394, CrPC provided liberty to near relatives of the deceased-accused to apply for leave to continue the appeal.Which means that all appeals, whether filed by the accused against his conviction or appeals submitted by the victim against the judgment of acquittal of the accused, would abate in the case of death of the appellant. But a proviso has been attached to Section 394 Cr.P.C. which gives liberty to the near relatives of the deceased-accused to apply for leave to continue the appeal and if such a leave is granted, the appeal shall not abate. "But no such liberty or right has been granted by the legislature to the legal representatives/heirs of the victim to apply for leave to continue the appeal, in which case if the leave is granted, the appeal submitted by the victim would not abate. The purpose of granting such liberty to the near relatives of the accused is to save the convict's family's honour. The victim's family members/ legal heirs must have the same rights to save the victim's family's honour. But no such right has been granted by the legislature to the near relatives/ legal heirs of the deceasedvictim to continue the appeal after his/her death. Such an act of the legislature is discriminatory and it is creating a differentiation between two equals and the same amounts to utter violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India".The court said that it "hopes, believes and trusts" that the legislature would think and deliberate upon this issue and will come out with necessary amendments to the proviso attached to Section 394 Cr.P.C., giving similar liberty to the legal heirs of the deceased victim as well viz., to file leave to application to continue the appeal, submitted against acquittal by the victim, in case of his/her death and the appeal would not abate.The Court held that victim's family members/ legal heirs must have the same rights. Otherwise, such disparity on part of the legislature was discriminatory and violative of Article 14.For context, the Court was hearing a petition challenging the order of the trial court wherein the appeal submitted by the deceased-appellant was dismissed as abated on account of her death. A criminal case was filed by the deceased-appellant against the respondents alleging cheating in which the respondents were acquitted. An appeal was filed against this order of acquittal by the deceased-appellant. During the pendency...

Deceased Victim's Legal Heirs Fall Under Ambit Of Section 2(wa) CrPC, Entitled To Continue Appeal Against Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

Deceased Victim's Legal Heirs Fall Under Ambit Of Section 2(wa) CrPC, Entitled To Continue Appeal Against Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers