VICTIM-CENTRIC CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN INDIA

Why In News?

The Supreme Court recently prioritized victim rights over the accused by refusing to club 53 investment scam FIRs, reinforcing a victim-centric criminal justice approach.

What is a Victim-Centric Criminal Justice System?

A victim-centric approach redefines the victim’s role from a passive witness or informant to an essential participant and active stakeholder in the legal process.

Recognition of Rights: It acknowledges that victims possess inherent rights to information, protection, restitution, and meaningful involvement throughout the criminal proceedings.

Restorative Justice Ethos: This system focuses on repairing harm caused by crime or violence. It prioritizes the needs of the victim while ensuring offenders take responsibility and understand the impact of their actions

Guiding Questions: Unlike traditional systems that ask what laws were broken, a victim-centric system asks:

• Who has been hurt?
• What are their needs?
• Whose obligations are these?

Dignity and Voice: It embeds victim-centricity by ensuring the "silent stakeholder" has a voice in decision-making, reparations, and the overall pursuit of justice.

How India's Criminal Justice System Function?

Historically, the Indian system operated under a state-centric model inherited from colonial-era laws like the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.

State-Accused Dichotomy: Criminal proceedings primarily involved a contest between the state and the accused. The state acted as the main actor, often marginalizing the victim.

Victims as Witnesses: The system viewed victims merely as complainants or witnesses with limited influence over critical stages like bail hearings, plea negotiations, or the withdrawal of cases.

Secondary Victimization: Lengthy legal proceedings, procedural delays, and insensitive investigative practices often caused trauma and disengagement, victimizing the individual a second time through the judicial process.

Underdeveloped Compensation: While compensation clauses existed under the CrPC (such as Section 357A), they were often discretionary, irregular, and rarely implemented effectively.

Judicial Activism vs Structural Inertia: Though the Supreme Court recognized victim rights in cases like Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum vs Union of India (1995), these remained jurisprudential rather than inherent procedural protections.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), effective July 1, 2024, replaces the CrPC to restructure how criminal procedure accommodates victims.

• Mandatory Information Rights:
• Police must provide a free copy of the FIR to the victim.
• The law mandates updates on investigation progress within 90 days.
• Victims receive timely information regarding charges, case pendency, and judicial actions via SMS or digital updates.
• Active Participation:
• Section 360 (BNSS): Requires the court to hear the victim before permitting the withdrawal of a case, filling a historical void in the CrPC.
• Victims have the right to provide Victim Impact Statements to express the pain and harm suffered in their own words.
• The law grants victims procedural standing to challenge case closures or inadequate compensation orders.
• Restitution and Compensation:
• Section 396 (BNSS): Mandates Central and State governments to establish Victim Compensation Schemes to cover medical costs, rehabilitation, and psychological support.
• Courts gain empowered authority to order restitution directly from offenders.
• Technological Integration:
• Zero-FIR: Allows victims to register an FIR at any police station regardless of the crime location.
• e-FIR: Facilitates reporting crimes online, eliminating the need to visit a station in person and wait in queues.
• Protection Measures:
• The BNSS codifies witness protection schemes to guarantee anonymity and safety.
• It mandates in-camera trials for sexual offenses to safeguard privacy and prevent intimidation.

How India Can Build a Balanced Victim-Centric Criminal Justice System?

To build a sustainable and balanced system, India must harmonize victim empowerment with the constitutional safeguards of the accused.

Preserving Due Process: Victim-centricity must not compromise the presumption of innocence or the right to a fair trial under Article 21. 

• Procedural neutrality ensures that the pursuit of victim justice does not lead to biased adjudication.

Institutional Capacity and Training: Shift from a "witness-centric" to a "victim-centric" paradigm through thorough training of police and judiciary in trauma-informed practices.

• Invest in infrastructure, including forensic laboratories and digital case management systems to meet BNSS timelines.

Integrating Restorative Practices: Move beyond purely retributive frameworks by adopting victim-offender mediation and facilitated dialogues.

• Focus on acknowledgment of harm and emotional closure, particularly in offenses where rehabilitation and accountability can coexist.

Closing the Implementation Gap: Ensure sustained financial allocations for compensation boards to prevent unfair waiting periods for relief.

• Launch multilingual awareness campaigns to address low legal literacy in rural and marginalized communities.

Addressing the Digital Divide: Technological reforms like e-FIRs must be supported by investments in digital literacy to ensure marginalized groups are not excluded from the new digital justice framework.

Institutional Accountability: Establish standardized metrics and judicial dashboards to track investigation timelines, conviction consistency, and compensation disbursement rates.

Conclusion

India can secure an effective justice system only by carefully harmonising the active empowerment and restitution of victims with the strict procedural and constitutional safeguards guaranteed to the accused. 

Source: THEHINDU