In stating that the victim of a crime ought to be heard at all stages of a trial, the Supreme Court judgment, in Jagjeet Singh v. Ashish Mishra (2022), essentially becomes a cause for celebration for victim rights advocates. This is historic in many ways as the courts in India have never made such a fervent plea for victim justice. While denying bail to Ashish Mishra in the Lakhimpur Kheri case, the court made sharp remarks legitimising the claims of victim to participate in the criminal justice process. The court observed that international instruments and trends as well as the recommendations of the law reform reports were in favour of granting greater participation for victims of crime.
Impact on victims
The judgment has far-reaching victimological implications. On a principled note, the court observed that our criminal justice system conflates the presence of the state with the presence of the victim. Such conflation is attributable to the traditional understanding of the criminal process wherein the trial is a contest between the state and the accused only. In sociologist and criminologist Nils Christie’s terminology, if we consider the conflict to be property, then the state claims ownership over the same. The conflict as property, however, must be restored to its rightful owner — the victim.
