Case Title: Vivek Kumar Gaurav vs. Union Of India
Case No.: W.P.(C) 1603/2024
Decided On: 05.02.2024
Coram: Hon’ble The Acting Chief Justice Hon’ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Facts of the Case:
In a recent Public Interest Litigation, the lawyer petitioner requested that chargesheets and notice be sent to complainants/victims at no cost to them at the pre-trial stage. Citing already-existing provisions in the CrPC, the respondent argued against this, claiming that requiring protections for victims might impede trials. The court dismissed the petition in favour of the respondent, stating that victim participation rights were previously recognised and citing current regulations that permit victims to access copies.
Legal Provisions
Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows victims to take part in criminal proceedings, and Section 207 of the CrPC, which requires the accused to provide certain documents, are among the legal elements at play in this case. Furthermore, the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 stipulates that chargesheets must be provided to victims at no cost.
Issues
The legal concerns centre on the rights of victims and complainants in criminal procedures, specifically with regard to chargesheet supply and involvement in pre-trial hearings. Important concerns include whether Article 14 of the Constitution may have been violated, if victims and complainants must get notices while their cases are pending, and whether the CrPC contains a particular clause addressing the transmission of chargesheets to victims. The application of current legal frameworks and judicial orders pertaining to victims’ rights is also a crucial topic of debate.
Courts analysis and decision
The court considered the petitioner’s request for instructions to give copies of chargesheets and notifications to victims while the case was pending. The absence of a particular provision in the CrPC requiring the distribution of free chargesheets to victims was observed, in contrast to requirements found in special legislation such as the SC/ST Act. The court did find that the current procedures—such as the Delhi High Court Rules and SOPs for sexual offenses—were sufficient to enable victims to get copies. It rejected to require pre-trial notices to be sent to victims, noting possible delays. The court denied the petition, permitting the petitioner to request modification at the trial court, finding that victims had adequate rights to participate in proceedings.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aastha Ganesh Tiwari
