Who can file appeal as per S 372 of CRPC on behalf of victim?

To summarize, the conclusions from the above discussion are:

(i) "victim" in Section 2(wa), by virtue of being defined as "a person who has suffered any loss or injury" must include a person who has suffered „harm caused to the mind‟, given that Section 2(y) of the Code of Criminal Procedure incorporates the definition of "injury" in Section 44 of the IPC into the Code.

(ii) The "means X and includes Y" clause in Section 2 (wa) cannot be interpreted so as to result in the included meaning Y excluding the actual meaning X of the term being defined; thus "legal heirs" who are included within the definition of the term „victim‟ cannot exclude those who CRL.A.1415/2012 Page 35 actually fall within the definition of „victim‟ by virtue of emotional harm suffered, such as the father or siblings of a deceased victim or other categories of persons (based on proximity) noted previously .

(iii) The laws of inheritance, which decide one‟s "legal heirs", are not intended to be solely determinative of the entitlement to exercise the rights of the victim, in the criminal trial/appeal, on his/her death, application of Heydon‟s mischief rule, given that the object of the 2008Amendment Act was to ensure the involvement of the victim, who has a presumably personal interest in the fair and efficient prosecution of the trial/appeal. Resultantly, it is impermissible for an appellate court to shut out an appeal by a "legal heir" based only on her/his not being an immediate heir, or being lower down in hierarchy vis-à-vis entitlement to the crime victim‟s estate.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Dated: 28.05.2015
 CRL.A.1415/2012
RAM PHAL .
Versus
STATE & ORS. ..
CORAM:
 MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
 MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
 MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

Read full judgment here: click here

Print Page