On comparing the definition of the word "victim" and that of injury, the word "injury" is included in the definition of the victim. Hence, the victim means the person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission, for which the accused person has been charged. Thus, any person who suffers any loss or injury illegally in body, mind, reputation or property by reason of the act or omission of the accused person, is victim.
Now, in case of acquittal, the same shall have been ordered in view of the charge not having been proved and hence quashed. viz no charge of act or omission of the accused person has been proved.
In the above case, how will the complainant be entitled to be called a victim? Can he enjoy the privileges under section 372?
Alternatively, in a case initiated on an ulterior motive of harassing the accused, will the rights of the accused not be prejudiced if the complainant/petitioner were to be treated as a victim?
In my opinion, in case of acquittals, where the charge has not been proved, the complainant should be allowed only the rights under section 378(4) of crpc.
Can the expert panel members kindly comment?
