It has been held by the Apex Court in Jagjeet Singh And Ors. v. Ashish Mishra @ Monu And Anr. that a victim has the right to participate and be heard in every stage of the trial right from investigation upto the date of final hearing/pronouncement of judgment and even in appeal/revision.

 A victim has been defined u/s 2 (wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which reads thus- “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 Court observed that where the victims themselves come forward to participate in a criminal proceeding, they should be given fair and effective hearing and remarked that "A 'victim' within the meaning of Cr.P.C. cannot be asked to await the commencement of trial for asserting his/her right to participate in the proceedings. He/She has a legally vested right to be heard at every step post the occurrence of an offence. Such a 'victim' has unbridled participatory rights from the stage of investigation till the culmination of the proceedings in an appeal or revision".

 The issue before the court was that whether a victim defined u/s 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is entitled to be heard at the stage of adjudication of bail application of an accused?

Answering it in affirmative, the Hon’ble Bench stated that "If the right to file an appeal against acquittal, is not accompanied with the right to be heard at the time of deciding a bail application, the same may result in grave miscarriage of justice. Victims certainly cannot be expected to be sitting on the fence and watching the proceedings from afar, especially when they may have legitimate grievances. It is the solemn duty of a court to deliver justice before the memory of an injustice eclipses.”

 The Court further noted that even though traditionally in the Criminal Jurisprudence, the parties to a criminal case are the State and the accused because a criminal act is regarded as an act against the State, but often in this traditional system the victim who is the actual sufferer is made to watch the proceedings as a mute spectator. Quoting various Indian and international sources and statutes, the court noted that the law has significantly evolved as far as the right of victims are concerned so much so that this very court in Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) v. State of Karnataka And Ors.^[1] has held that The rights of victims, and indeed victimology, is an evolving jurisprudence and it is more than appropriate to move forward in a positive direction, rather than stand still or worse, take a step backward. A voice has been given to victims of crime by Parliament and the judiciary and that voice needs to be heard, and if not already heard, it needs to be raised to a higher decibel so that it is clearly heard."

The Hon’ble Bench while cancelling the bail of the accused also remarked that victim' has unbridled participatory rights at every step of the criminal trial and also differentiated between the term ‘victim’ and ‘complainant’ which hold different meanings under the criminal jurisprudence. An informant/ complainant of a crime may not always be a victim for even a stranger can report the crime. Therefore, a person who falls under the definition of victim prescribed under the criminal law reserves the right to participate in every stage of the criminal trial until the case is closed.

^[1](2019) 2 SCC 752