Can the third party challenge the criminal proceedings?
Locus of a third party to challenge the criminal proceedings or to seek relief in respect of criminal proceedings of the accused had been dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases.
Topic #004
Who are the Parties?
In order to understand the subject under discussion, one must have an idea as to who are considered to be the parties under Criminal Law and who others are termed as the third parties. As we all know, the accused, alleged to have committed the crime, the prosecution and the victim are considered to be parties to criminal law.
Who is a Victim?
According to Section 2 (wa) of Cr. P.C, a victim is 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.
Third Party
However, the victim in a crime is not considered to be a party to the criminal case because crimes are considered to be wrongs committed against society as a whole. Therefore any person other than State and Accused would fall under the category of 3rd Party under the Criminal Law.
Challenge
With regard to the locus of a third party to challenge the criminal proceedings or to seek relief in respect of criminal proceedings of the accused had been dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Janata Dal vs. H.S. Chowdhary and others1.
In the above case, the CBI had registered FIR under the IPC as well as under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 against 14 accused. On an application filed by the CBI the learned trial Judge allowing the application to the extent that a request to conduct the necessary investigation and to collect necessary evidence which can be collected in Switzerland passed the order on 05.02.1990 which is to the following effect:
"4. ….In the result, the application of the CBI is allowed to the extent that a request to conduct the necessary investigation and to collect necessary evidence which can be collected in Switzerland and to the extent directed in this order shall be made to the Competent Judicial Authorities of the Confederation of Switzerland through the filing of the requisite/proper undertaking required by the Swiss law and assurance for reciprocity.”
A criminal miscellaneous application was filed by Shri H.S. Chowdhary seeking various prayers before the Special Judge which petition was dismissed by the Special Judge. A criminal Revision under Sections 397/482 Cr. P.C. was filed by H.S. Chowdhary in the High Court to quash the order of the Special Judge, which Revision was also dismissed by the High Court. The appeals were filed in this Court by different parties challenging the said order including H.S. Chowdhary. This Court while dismissing the appeals filed by the H.S. Choudhary and others made the following observations:
“26. Even if there are a million questions of law to be deeply gone into and examined in a criminal case of this nature registered against specified accused persons, it is for them and them alone to raise all such questions and challenge the proceedings initiated against them at the appropriate time before the proper forum and not for third parties under the garb of public interest litigants.
“27. We, in the above background of the case, after bestowing our anxious and painstaking consideration and careful thought to all aspects of the case and deeply examining the rival contentions of the parties both collectively and individually give our conclusions as follows:
Mr. H.S. Chowdhary has no locus standi (a) to file the petition under Article 51A as a public interest litigant praying that no letter rogatory/request be issued at the request of the CBI and he be permitted to join the inquiry before the Special Court which on 5.2.90 directed issuance of a letter rogatory/request to the Competent Judicial Authorities of the Confederation of Switzerland; (b) to invoke the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Sections 397 read with 401 of the CrPC challenging the correctness, legality or propriety of the order dated 18.8.90 of the Special Judge and (c) to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing the First Information Report dated 22.1.90 and all other proceedings arising therefrom on the plea of preventing the abuse of the process of the Court.
28. In the result, we agree with the first part of the Order dated 19.12.90 of Mr. Justice M.K. Chawla holding that Mr. H.S. Chowdhary and other intervening parties have no locus standi. We, however, set aside the second part of the impugned order whereby he has taken suo moto cognizance and issued show cause notice to the State and CBI and accordingly the show cause notice issued by him is quashed.”
This Court in the above case laid down that it is for the parties in the criminal case to raise all the questions and challenge the proceedings initiated against them at appropriate time before the proper forum and not for third parties under the garb of Public Interest Litigants.
In the case of Thakur Ram v. State of Bihar2, the Hon'ble Supreme Court ruled that in a case which has proceeded on a police report, a private party has no locus standi. It further ruled that, barring a few exceptions, in criminal matters, the aggrieved party is the State, which is the custodian of the social interests of the community at large, and so it is necessary for the State to take all steps necessary for bringing the person who has acted against the social interests of the community, to book.
In Panchhi v. State of U.P.3, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had refused leave to the National Commission for Women to intervene in an appeal before this Court wherein a young mother was facing execution of the capital sentence imposed on her on the ground that the National Commission for Women or for that matter any other organisation cannot have locus standi in a criminal case.
(Also refer 2020 SCC Online SC 1027 - Sanjai Tiwari vs State of Uttar Pradesh)
If you like our research work and would like to support us, you can contribute to support
For queries & suggestions, do email us on criminallawindia@gmail.com
With Regards
Team, Criminal Laws India’s Newsletter
Was this newsletter useful to you? Help us improve!
With your feedback, we can improve the newsletter. Click on a link to vote:
(1991) 3 SCC 756 - Para 4, 26, 27 & 28.
AIR 1966 SC 911
(1998) 7 SCC 177