S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. This is a reference to a Full Bench in Crl. A. No. 1451/2012. The reference stems from issues arising out of the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Chattar Singh v. Subhash and Ors., 176 (2011) DLT 356, and concerns the locus standi of private parties to maintain appeals by virtue of the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereafter “Cr. PC”).

2. The relevant statutory provisions are excerpted for convenience. First, Section 2(wa) of the Cr. PC defines “victim” as:

"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 second provision is Section 372 of the Cr.PC, which stipulates that:

“No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or any other law for the time being in force.”

The third statutory provision is the proviso to Section 372, Cr. PC, which was introduced in 2008, conferring upon victims, the right of appeal in these terms:

"Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court."

The reference

3. The two questions that arise for this Court’s consideration, by virtue of the order of reference, are outlined below:

(a) Whether the word 'victim' in Section 2(wa) of the Cr. PC would mean only the legal heirs entitled to the property of the victim under the law applicable of inheritance or would embrace any person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused person has been charged.

(b) Whether the appellate remedy is available with respect to only such offences which were committed as on the date when the appellate right was conferred by law or the appellate right would be available with respect to the date of the decision or the appellate remedy is without any reference to the two points of time i.e. the date when the offence was committed or when the appellate right was conferred by law, (Act No.5 of 2009 with effect from 31.12.2009).

Legislative History

4. A victim-oriented approach to certain aspects of criminal procedure was advocated in the Law Commission of India’s 154th Report, 1996, which noted that “increasingly, the attention of criminologists, penologists and reformers of criminal justice system has been directed to victimology, control of victimization and protection of the victims of crimes.” (Chapter XV, Paragraph 1) While focused on issues of compensation, the Law Commission Report cited the 1985 United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power for its definition of “victim”:

“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.” (Chapter XV, Paragraph 6.2).

5. The said report prompted the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill of 2006. Its Statement of Objects and Reasons noted that

“the Law Commission has undertaken a comprehensive review of the Code of Criminal Procedure in its 154th report and its recommendations have been found very appropriate, particularly those relating to provisions concerning arrest, custody and remand, procedure for summons and warrant-cases, compounding of offences, victimology, special protection in respect of women and inquiry and trial of persons of unsound mind.”

It also noted that “at present, the victims are the worst sufferers in a crime and they don't have much role in the court proceedings. They need to be given certain rights a