{"id":1977,"date":"2024-06-10T14:11:37","date_gmt":"2024-06-10T08:41:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/?p=1977"},"modified":"2024-06-10T14:15:14","modified_gmt":"2024-06-10T08:45:14","slug":"delhi-hc-holds-that-victim-has-right-to-participate-in-trial-but-no-right-to-be-impleaded-in-revision","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/delhi-hc-holds-that-victim-has-right-to-participate-in-trial-but-no-right-to-be-impleaded-in-revision\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi HC holds that victim has right to participate in trial but no right to be impleaded in revision"},"content":{"rendered":"

VLS FINANCE LTD\u00a0 [<\/strong>Petitioner] Vs. <\/strong>STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS \u00a0\u00a0<\/strong>[Respondents]<\/h1>\n

CRL.M.C. 8758\/2023 & CRL.M.A. 7381\/2024<\/p>\n

(CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA<\/strong>)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Facts:<\/u><\/strong> This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the Order dated 26.10.2023\u00a0 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-05, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Criminal Revision Petitions filed by the petitioner herein seeking impleadment and to be heard in all the Revision Petitions pending before the learned ASJ.<\/p>\n

Issue:<\/u><\/strong> 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?<\/p>\n

Arguments on behalf of counsel for petitioner:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned ASJ has erred in not considering the fact that the petitioner, who is the complainant\/victim, has a legally vested and unbridled participatory rights to be heard at every stage of the criminal proceedings, right from the stage of investigation till the culmination of the proceedings in an appeal or revision. In support, he places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Jagjeet Singh & Ors. v. Ashish Mishra @ Monu & Anr<\/em><\/strong>., (2022) 9 SCC 321. He submits that the complainant\/victim, that is, the de facto sufferer, cannot be made to sit outside the Court as a mute spectator and let the Court adjudicate between the accused and the State.<\/p>\n

Arguments on behalf of counsel for respondents:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Mr.Aman Usman, the learned APP submits that the duties and responsibilities of a Public Prosecutor are multi-fold. He submits that the right of the State, through its Prosecutors, ensures that the law not only protects the Fundamental Rights of the victims of crime, but also of the witnesses, the accused, and the Court, to whom the Prosecutors owe a responsibility. He submits that it is the Prosecutor who has the full access to the evidence of a criminal case and helps the Court as a central figure to ensure that justice is done. He submits that Public Prosecutors are the persons who have the right to effectively defend the State in a State case. In support, he places reliance on the judgment of this Court in Antosh v. State.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Held:<\/u><\/strong> The court disposed off the present petition and held that, \u201cthe Impugned Order, insofar as it holds that the petitioner cannot be impleaded as a party to the Revision Petitions, has to be sustained. However, insofar as it restricts the right of the petitioner only to assisting the Court through the medium of the learned APP therein or to plead its case only through the learned APP therein, cannot be upheld. As noted hereinabove, the petitioner, being the alleged victim, has an independent right to be heard in the Revision Petitions pending adjudication before the learned ASJ, especially as they seek the closure\/culmination of the criminal proceedings against the accused\/revisionist(s). Any order passed in favour of the accused\/revisionist(s) in the Revision Petitions would, therefore, also prejudice the petitioner.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

VLS FINANCE LTD\u00a0 [Petitioner] Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS \u00a0\u00a0[Respondents] CRL.M.C. 8758\/2023 & CRL.M.A. 7381\/2024 (CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA)   Facts: This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the Order dated 26.10.2023\u00a0 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-05, Central District, Tis […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1978,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1977","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-judgement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1977","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1977"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1977\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1982,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1977\/revisions\/1982"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1978"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1977"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1977"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1977"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}