Introduction
We are all well aware of the sciences, Penology and Criminology, which deal with the Penal System and the psyche of criminals. But in recent times a new science which has emerged is Victimology that looks at the criminal justice from the lens of victims unlike the traditional set-up. The name Criminal Justice System signifies a system that is criminal-centric and as such the victim is often forgotten. It is generally assumed that the parties in any criminal proceedings are the Prosecution which represents the State and the Defence which is the Accused, but there also exists a Third-Party, that is the victims who are seldom considered as a party to criminal proceedings. There are multiple challenges faced by victims when they come to the forefront of the criminal justice system and one of the most preliminary ones is the lack of substantive rights available to them so as to secure a dignified position in the proceedings involving them.

The article seeks to examine both national as well as international concepts that can help create a situation wherein both the accused and victim have equitable rights in a criminal trial. It also seeks to analyse some Statutory Provisions, Judicial Pronouncements and International Instruments that could contribute in making the Indian justice system more accessible for the victim to take part in.

Concept and Definition of Victim
The term “victim” in its etymological sense entails any person who might have suffered any kind of injury or misfortune but when the same is considered legally, the term has a particular definition which is provided under the statutes.

As to the definition of “victim”, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 under section 2(wa) provides - “victim- means 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.”

The definition in the Code can be seen to be very restrictive in nature and is also qualifying in nature to the extent that it necessitates that the “accused person be charged”, the same clearly does not consider situations wherein there is loss or injury to the victim but the accused cannot be found and charged. The victims in such cases by way of the definition in the Code cannot be considered as victims and as a consequence they are disqualified from availing the recourses provided in the Code that ideally should be available to them. In spite of the same various courts have attempted to use this very definition to attribute certain rights to the victims such as giving them the right to be heard at the time of Bail Applications and assist the Public Prosecutors in the same. Thus, the emergence of subjects like Victimology deal with the various lacunae in the traditional justice system of various nations and seek to provide solutions for these situations. If we move towards International Law and see the definition of Victim as provided by the “Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power” the same is a very exhaustive definition and considers various levels of victimization as well as various types of victims. The definition in this Declaration as adopted by the United Nations reads as follows-

“1. "Victims mean persons who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws operative within Member States, including those laws prescribing criminal abuse of power.
2. A person may be considered a victim, under this Declaration, regardless of whether the perpetrator is identified, apprehended, prosecuted or convicted and regardless of the familial relationship between the perpetrator and the victim. The term "victim" also includes, where appropriate, the immediate family or dependants of the direct victim and persons who have suffered harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization.”

This definition in the Declaration is expansive in nature and clearly solves the major issues that have impaired the definition of Victim in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It solves the most basic concern highlighted above that it is not sine qua non for the accused person to be identified so as to consider someone to be a victim and even states that various people who may be associated with the victim even not by blood are deemed to be victims. The interpretation given to the concept of victim clearly allows them to have complete and proper participation in criminal proceedings without prescribing any additional qualifications upon them to be even considered as victims. This discussion is necessary so as to analyse the statutory and judicial dimensions because if the definition in its essence is rectified a lot of rights regarding their participation can be granted to victims.

Legislative Provisions relating to Victim Participation in a Criminal Proceeding
Few legislations exist in India and internationally that empower the victims by giving them certain rights to participate in the criminal trial. Some of them are as follows: -

National Legislations
A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The Procedural law that regulates criminal trials in India has certain provisions that allow the victim to participate in the proceedings instituted by them. The provisions under Section 24 if read with Sections 301 and 302 of the Criminal Procedure Code do highlight the fact that the victim or informant can appoint a lawyer on their behalf and ask them to represent their case in the court. The provisions are colloquially known as the provisions dealing with the concept of “Right to Assist Prosecution”. Although the provisions allow the victims to seek representation by way of their lawyer, the same, by law, is subject to the discretion of the Public Prosecutor trying the case and hence is usually curtailed. Furthermore Section 302 of the Code differs from the provisions envisaged under Section 301 to the extent that the latter deals with the victims assisting the prosecutors while the former allows the victims/complainant to conduct the prosecution independently by filing an application to that effect. The procedure under Section 302 allows any private person to conduct the prosecution themselves or by appointing a pleader to act on their behalf before the Magistrate’s Court after taking due permission of the Magistrate¹. This allows a direct access to the victims to participate in the proceedings but this is again subject to the permission of the Magistrate. The problem pertaining to this provision is that it is limited to only Magistrate Courts and the right to conduct prosecution is not extended to Sessions Court. Hence it can be said that though victims have right to independently prosecute some impediments still exist in realizing these rights to the fullest. While dealing with appeals in criminal matters, a proviso to Section 372 was added by way of an Amendment to the Code passed in the year 2009 that allowed the Victims to challenge the acquittal of the accused or to challenge the conviction of the accused wherein a lesser sentence has been imposed and just compensation has not been awarded by the trial courts. Thus, it becomes clear that though the victims may not have the right to conduct the trial independent of the prosecution when it comes to the appellate stage the victims have an unfettered independent right to challenge the decision of the trial courts. Even in cases of bail for sexual offences such as Sections 376(3), 376-AB, 376-DB of the Indian Penal Code,1860, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was amended and Section 439 (1-A) was added that mandated the Informant or his representative be present when the application is being heard but the provision is only restricted to certain offences enumerated in the provision and not general in nature. Therefore, from the procedural law it can be ascertained that the victims have different sets of rights when it comes to participation in criminal trials before trial courts and appellate courts.

B) The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989
This Act is one of the most detailed laws when it comes to victim-rights and it dedicates an entire chapter for the same. The Chapter IVA which was added in the year 2016 thereby granting a bundle of rights to the victim and their dependents to even take part in trial by way of appearance and arguments at every stage. Section 15A of the Act allows the victim to be informed and heard at all stages of the proceedings instituted on their behalf and even submit written submissions in all the proceedings such as bail, discharge etc. This Act could be hailed to be the Magna Carta of victim rights. Although its application is limited to the people belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes, this law can serve as a guiding principle to suggest amendment in the general laws of the land.

C) Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
Another special legislation that grants victims a right of legal representation is the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The provisions under Section 40 of the Act read with Rule 7 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2020 clearly establish that minor victims and their guardians have the right of legal aid and representation in proceedings initiated under this law. Rule 4(15) makes it the duty of the special police dealing with such cases as well as other officers involved in such cases to inform the minor victim or their guardian about the various developments in the case right from the investigation to sentencing. The knowledge about the proceedings in turn empowers the victims so as to oppose bail or discharge applications strengthening their participation in the trials. Thus, this is another novel legislation in the Indian context that makes the victims a prime focus of the criminal justice system.

International Legislations
A) Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1988
The proceedings in the International Criminal Court have tri-partite representation by way of the state which is represented through the prosecution, the victim is represented individually and the accused as the defence. This court is a rare judicial set up that allows such arrangement and thus it is important how this works in practice. In Article 15(3) the victims have been granted an independent right to make representation to the pre-trial chamber of the court without the involvement of the prosecutor. In continuation to the same the victims can also contest the evidence and make submissions as to admission and rejection of evidence before the court thus making them involved at every stage of the trial. And under the Article 82 even appeals can be filed by victims thus it is clear that victims in cases of international criminal law can file a case and even maintain an appeal for crimes against them independently.

Judicial view on Victim Participation in a Criminal Proceedings
National Judicial View
In the Indian context though the rights of victims to participate in the criminal trial may not have been specified within the statutes, it is the Supreme Court as well as various High Courts all across India that have developed the existing jurisprudence with respect to allowing victims to take part in criminal proceedings. The judiciary of India through its various judgements have enshrined that victims also have a say in these proceedings.

A) Jagjeet Singh vs Ashish Mishra ²
The case is also famously known as the “Lakhimpur Kheri case” and relates to the protests by farmers against the Farm Bills, 2020 and the protests thus turned violent and the accused ran over some farmers in protest at the site thereby killing a few farmers and journalists at the location. The accused thus was arrested and subsequently granted bail by the Allahabad High Court which was challenged before the Supreme Court.

The Court had to adjudicate the case in light of the submissions made that the victim was not allowed to represent their case in a proper manner and they must be allowed to be heard before deciding upon the bail applications. The Court thus recognized that there were three parties in the criminal justice system i.e., Prosecution, Victim and the Accused. The victim who actually suffered the crime was forced to sit outside the Court as a mute spectator and had no say in the adjudicatory process. However, as it became clear that the criminal justice system’s mentality of preventing and punishing ‘crime’ had unwittingly turned its back on the ‘victim’, the jurisprudence pertaining to victim’s rights to be heard and participate in the criminal processes has begun to improve.

The Court in this case took a very victim centric view and created the scope for developing a victim based criminal justice system unlike the already existing accused centric one. The Court thus had granted the victim unbridled rights to take part in criminal proceedings right from the investigation to appeal or revision. This case creates the necessary jurisprudence where India needs to make victim rights a practical reality. Thus, by this case the court paved way to allow victim participation pre-trial.

B) Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum vs Union of India ³
The case related to certain female domestic servants who at the time were travelling by train and there were also a few army officers who were present in the same train compartment. It was stated that some of these officers attempted and even raped these women while on the train and harassed them. This incident thus led to the filing of an FIR at Delhi and intervention of behalf of the Petitioner forum in the form of Writ Petition so as to safeguard the rights of these victims. The Court in the present case agreed to intervene in its writ jurisdiction as this case brought to light the abuse of power done at the hands of these officers. The Court even went on to state that there is a need to relook as to how offences of rape are seen and Courts, lawyers as well as the police authorities must change their outlook when dealing with the same. The Court while deciding the case gave various directions out of which two of the most necessary ones were that in cases pertaining to sexual assaults, a lawyer should be appointed for the victim, who should explain and assist the victim in legal matters. The victim may choose her own lawyer also and in case such a victim is unable to appoint one, a lawyer through legal aid ought to be provided. Even during questioning and investigations, such a lawyer should remain present with the victim. The court thus clearly stated that victims can have the right to take part in the criminal proceedings right from the investigation stage.

C) Vinay Poddar vs State of Maharashtra ⁴
The factual background of the case related to an Anticipatory Bail Application filed by the Applicant wherein the application was rejected by the Sessions Court. The Applicant had thus challenged the rejection of bail primarily on the ground that the Sessions Judge had allowed the Victim to oppose the said Bail Application. The Court while dealing with the issue remarked it is impossible to lay down the proposition that the victim/informant cannot be heard at the stage of granting anticipatory bail. The Court even stated that the victim or complainant becomes an important party so as to get relevant factual information on record at such a nascent stage of investigations. A complainant or victim that appears before the court so as to oppose such applications has to be heard though issuing notice to them is not mandated by law but if they wish to oppose the applications this right cannot be denied to them. The Court by virtue of this judgement clearly laid down the law that even in cases at a preliminary stage, the victims have a right of audience and their say can be considered in evaluating whether bail should to be granted or not.

D) Karan vs State of NCT Delhi⁵
The facts of the case related to the murder of one Gulfam at the hands of the accused persons and two others one of whom was also a juvenile. The proceedings as to the juvenile were sent to the Juvenile Justice Board while the two accused persons namely the appellant and one other were convicted by the Court for the murder of the victim. The Court while determining the case also discussed the scope and ambit of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that allowed for victim compensation and stated that victimology, and the protection of victims to a crime have become increasingly important to criminologists, penologists, and criminal justice reformers. Crimes frequently result in actual harm to persons, not only symbolic harm to the social order. As a result, in the overall response to crime, the needs and rights of victims of crime should be prioritized. Compensation to victims of crime is a well-known way of victim protection. The Delhi High Court made a significant advancement in the criminal justice system’s victim restitution procedure. The Court has ordered that the perpetrators file an affidavit after their conviction, disclosing their income, assets, liabilities, and expenditures in order for the trial courts to make an accurate approximation of the restitutive amount to be paid to the victim or their family in the event of the victim’s death, for which it was stated that the Court must take into consideration the effect of the offence on the victim’s family even though human life cannot be measured. The judgement of the Court in this case showcases that even at the time of determination of sentence and compensation amount, a victim has to be made a party to the proceedings so as to arrive at a just and equitable decision.

The case became one of extreme importance so as to protect victim rights as it allowed for the victim to convey their suffering through a victim impact report that the Court must look into before sentencing and use the report to arrive at a decision that is fair to both the accused as well as the victim. This is the first case in Indian legal history that has spoken about victim impact statement and as such rises to landmark status.

International Judicial View
A) The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda ⁶
The International Criminal Court dealt with the present case pertaining to war crimes that were perpetrated by the Accused who was a political leader. The case becomes pertinent in light of the victim’s right to participate in criminal trials. The case was one such case wherein the prosecution was triggered due to victim representation and while dealing with the legalities of such prosecution the court stated that the Rome Statute places a premium on victim’s participation in proceedings thereby attempting to shift the paradigm away from criminal proceedings in domestic law and recognise victims as vital partners in the criminal justice system. This was regarded by the Court as a unique feature of the Rome Statute. The case received landmark stature because here the prosecutor was asked by the Court specifically to consider the representations made by the victims and to prosecute accordingly, granting the victims a dignified place in the proceedings.

Conclusion
Hence it is now time to realize that the criminal justice system is not limited to being a bi-partisan system but has moved towards a tri-partite one. Victims have to be an integral party while the Courts adjudicate the injuries suffered by them. The participation helps bring about a balanced approach wherein all the necessary parties can put forward their views. Internationally as we could see victim participation is a mandatory rule of procedure but in the Indian context their participation is limited and discretionary. Thus, it can be seen that various courts across Indian have taken a pragmatic view thereby allowing victims to take part in criminal proceedings which in the near future will solidify the criminal justice system to be tri-partite system.

By - Aadit Ved