Published On: December 8th 2025
Authored By: Aparna Singh
City Law College, University of Lucknow
ABSTRACT
This paper takes a hard look at the shifting terrain of victim rights in India, spotlighting the gradual move away from a justice system that once put offenders front and center, toward one that finally lends an ear to the voices of victims. For far too long, victims were left out in the cold—treated as mere spectators in their own pursuit of justice, often reduced to informants or passive witnesses with little say and even less support. As the saying goes, “Justice delayed is justice denied,” and for many victims, justice wasn’t just delayed—it was barely offered.
The enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, stands as a watershed moment—a legislative turning point that signals India’s intent to turn over a new leaf. The paper delves into key victim-forward provisions such as the right to be heard before the withdrawal of prosecution, the introduction of Zero FIR, access to compensation and reimbursement, in-camera trials, and stronger safeguards for vulnerable populations. These reforms suggest that India is finally catching up with global norms on victim justice, echoing the spirit of restorative and procedural justice.
Yet, despite these steps in the right direction, the road ahead is far from smooth. Legal awareness remains low, personnel often lack proper training, and systemic indifference continues to throw a wrench in the works. As one legal scholar aptly put it, “Laws are only as good as their implementation.”
Through a blend of case law analysis, policy critique, and theoretical insight, the paper makes a compelling case for deeper structural reforms. In the end, the study urges a justice system that doesn’t just tick boxes but truly walks the talk—one that is inclusive, empathetic, and committed to upholding the constitutional pledge of justice for all, especially those who’ve long been pushed to the margins. After all, “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.” — Mahatma Gandhi.
INTRODUCTION
Criminal law has historically prioritized the punishment of offenders while rendering victims peripheral to the justice process. By framing crime as an act against the state rather the individual, thereby eclipsing the voice of the individual most affected. The traditional system has concentrated on crime as an offence against the state, thereby eclipsing the rights and voices of victims. State has always been concerned about the rehabilitation of the convict once he is out of the prison but what about the victim when the horror of the crime continues to haunt him. In consequence, the victims are sometime termed as “a forgotten entity” in the Indian criminal justice administration.
However, a steady progression towards a new outlook has become evident in recent years. One significant aspect to be noted is the change in nomenclature of the act. The change in operative word from Danda (Punishment) to Nyaya (Justice) denotes a fundamental change in the basis of criminal prosecution from penalising to delivering justice. This shift is particularly visible in India’s evolving legal landscape, expanding victim compensation schemes, and most recently, the enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which introduces several provisions aimed at empowering victims within the criminal justice system. (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2023)
Victim-centric justice is an approach to the legal system that prioritizes the well-being, rights, and personal experiences of victims throughout the entire judicial process. Instead of viewing victims simply as sources of evidence, this framework ensures they are treated as central participants. It promotes fairness in how procedures are carried out—known as procedural justice—by focusing on respectful treatment, clear communication, emotional care, and meaningful involvement in legal decisions. Victims are kept informed, given opportunities to speak, and supported in ways that uphold their dignity and ensure transparency at every stage of the case.
Victim Rights Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023: A New Constitutional Turn
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 brings forward groundbreaking changes that place victims at the centre of India’s criminal justice system. Moving away from the historically offender-focused approach of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the BNSS introduces a comprehensive set of rights and procedural protections for victims. Right to Be Heard Before Withdrawal of Prosecution Under Section 360, prosecutors are now required to consult victims before withdrawing prosecution. This provision gives victims a participatory role in proceedings that could otherwise exclude them from key decision making moments (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2023).
- Zero FIR Mechanism
Section 173 allows victims to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) at any police station, regardless of jurisdiction. Known as the “Zero FIR” provision, it ensures immediate legal recognition of the victim’s complaint, particularly critical in time-sensitive cases (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2023).
- Access to FIR Copies
Victims are now entitled to receive free copies of their FIRs, promoting transparency and allowing them to monitor the progress of their case from the very beginning (BNSS, 2023).
- In-Camera Trials
Section 366 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 ensures that victims—especially in cases involving sexual offences—are treated with respect and discretion by mandating closed-door hearings. These proceedings are ideally overseen by a female judge or magistrate to foster a more sensitive and supportive environment.
- Protections for Vulnerable Victims
According to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, female victims must be questioned by women police officers to ensure comfort and sensitivity. Additionally, victims with physical or mental disabilities have the right to give their statements at a location they prefer, with support from interpreters or specially trained educators to aid communication.
- Notification of Case Closure
The BNSS, 2023 requires that victims be notified when their case is closed, making sure they’re kept in the loop and not left out of the final outcome.
- Right to appeal
Under Section 413 of the BNSS, 2023, victims have the right to challenge court decisions—whether it’s an acquittal, a conviction for a less serious offence, or compensation they feel is insufficient. This gives them a meaningful role even after the trial ends, ensuring their concerns are part of the justice process.
- Compensation to Victims
Section 395 of the BNSS, 2023 empowers courts to direct the accused to compensate victims, even if no fine is imposed. This acknowledges the financial strain and emotional suffering victims endure, and provides a way to help them recover through monetary support.
- Reimbursement of Legal and Travel Expenses
Section 350 of the BNSS, 2023 allows victims to seek compensation for the costs they’ve had to bear while taking part in investigations and court proceedings. It’s a way to ease the financial strain that often comes with long legal battles.
Has BNSS truly shifted focus to empower victims?
Though the BNSS introduces encouraging reforms, a closer analysis highlights a number of troubling gaps and challenges.
- Insufficient victim support services
Though compensation is emphasized, there is still no clear mandate for psychological counseling or shelter services embedded within the BNSS. It falls short of explicitly requiring access to mental health support or safe housing for victims.
- Execution is still unclear:
Legal changes frequently face hurdles in becoming real-world practice because of gaps in infrastructure and shortages in trained personnel.
- Restricted victim involvement:
Aside from a few procedural rights, victims are still largely excluded from deeper engagement in the justice process, like taking part in plea deals or restorative justice efforts—a classic case of being left out in the cold when it comes to meaningful participation.
So, while the BNSS marks a step in the right direction, whether it truly empowers victims will hinge on strong execution, thoughtful judicial interpretation, and unwavering institutional support—because even the best blueprint is just paper until it’s built upon.
Challenges to Victim-Centric Justice in India
Even with encouraging legal and judicial strides, India’s path to truly victim-focused justice remains tangled in deep-rooted and ongoing obstacles. The disconnect between what the law promises and what actually happens on the ground continues to throw a wrench in the pursuit of justice for countless victims. This section takes the bull by the horns to unpack the major roadblocks—legal loopholes, institutional inertia, deep-rooted social norms, and structural flaws—that stand in the way of truly putting victims in the driver’s seat of India’s criminal justice system
- Implementation Gaps and Institutional Apathy
One of the biggest roadblocks to victim justice is the weak execution of victim-focused laws. Although provisions like Section 357A of the CrPC and the BNSS emphasize compensation and victim participation, they often fall flat due to sluggish administration and lack of funding.
Victim Compensation Schemes are barely tapped into, largely because District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) struggle with staff shortages, limited budgets, and vague procedures (NALSA, 2022). On top of that, many victims remain in the dark about their rights and available support simply because there’s little effort to educate or reach out to them. Legal literacy programs are scarce, and without them, victims are left to navigate a complex system alone.
- Low legal awareness among victims.
Many victims fail to claim their rights—not out of choice, but simply because they’re unaware those rights exist. As the saying goes, “You can’t ask for what you don’t know you’re entitled to.” This lack of awareness is made worse by several entrenched issues:
- Low literacy levels, particularly among women, Dalits, Adivasis, and other marginalized groups, create a barrier to understanding legal protections and procedures.
- The absence of dedicated support personnel—such as victim liaison officers in police stations and courts—means victims are often left to navigate a maze of legal formalities alone, with no one to show them the ropes.
- State legal aid bodies fall short in spreading awareness, despite clear responsibilities under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. As a result, legal literacy remains a distant dream for many.
In essence, victims are expected to fight for justice while blindfolded—a textbook example of being set up to fail. Without proactive outreach and education, the promise of justice remains just that: a promise
- Undertrained and Overburdened Police and Judiciary
Police may neglect FIRs or delay investigations, especially when influential accused are involved. Courts can retraumatize victims through insensitive procedures, particularly in sexual violence cases. Poor coordination in forensic and medical services further hampers justice. Without systemic reform, victim-centric laws remain largely ineffective in practice.
Judicial role in shaping victim-focused legal principles in India
Here are several landmark rulings that have played a pivotal role in defining and advancing the legal framework surrounding victims’ rights in India.
Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India (1995)
The Court mandated that survivors of rape must receive legal aid, psychological support, and temporary financial assistance. It also recommended setting up a dedicated board to handle compensation for criminal injuries. This directive laid the groundwork for future policy debates around comprehensive victim support systems, which were later formalized in Section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty (1996)
The Supreme Court declared that rape constitutes a violation of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. It introduced the principle of interim compensation for survivors, even before the trial concludes—marking a significant shift toward victim-centric justice. The Court emphasized that criminal law must be responsive to the needs of victims, and that compensation is not just a statutory requirement but a moral duty of the State.
As the Court poignantly stated: “Rape is not only a crime against the body of a woman, but a crime against her dignity, self-esteem, and her very soul.”
Mallikarjun Kodagali v. State of Karnataka (2018)
The Supreme Court held that a victim has the right to appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation, thereby strengthening the victim’s legal standing in criminal litigation.
Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2019)
The Supreme Court left no stone unturned in setting out detailed guidelines for compensating victims of sexual violence under the NALSA Victim Compensation Scheme. It drove home the point that a victim’s privacy, dignity, and mental well-being must be safeguarded at every step. The Court insisted that their identity be kept under wraps throughout the legal process, ensuring that justice doesn’t come at the cost of personal trauma. By putting these protections front and center, the judgment showed that the system must walk the talk when it comes to victim care.
Rekha Murarka v. State of West Bengal (2020)
In this decision, the Court reiterated that while a victim has a right to engage a lawyer under Section 301(2) CrPC, this lawyer cannot directly examine or cross-examine witnesses without the permission of the Court. This clarified the limited but evolving role of victim participation in the courtroom.
Conclusion
Repositioning victims at the center of India’s criminal justice system is essential for building a more inclusive, equitable, and restorative approach to justice. While the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 marks a significant legislative leap by embedding victim rights and protections, the real challenge lies in translating these reforms from paper to practice. As the saying goes, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions,” and without proper implementation, even the most progressive laws can fall flat.
Despite legal advancements, persistent issues—such as limited public awareness, undertrained personnel, and fragile support systems—continue to leave victims in the lurch.. As Martin Luther King Jr. powerfully stated, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” To truly walk the talk, India must foster stronger collaboration between academia, law enforcement, and civil society. As Eleanor Roosevelt once said, “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.”
Ultimately, a fair and effective justice system must empower victims—not just as witnesses, but as active participants in the legal process As John F. Kennedy reminded us, “The rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.” Balancing the rights of both victims and the accused is not just a legal challenge—it’s a moral one.
REFERENCES
- G.S. Bajpai, Victim Rights and Criminal Justice in India (National Law University Press 2020).
- Upendra Baxi, The Crisis of the Indian Legal System (Vikas Publishing House 1982).
- Shivika Goyal, Repositioning the Victim: A Critical Analysis of Victim-Centric Justice in India, 5 Indian J. Legal Rev. (Issue 11) (2025).
- Benjamin Mendelsohn, A New Branch of Bio-Psycho-Social Science: La Victimologie, Revue Internationale de Criminologie et de Police Technique (1956).
- National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), Performance Evaluation of Victim Compensation Schemes in India (2022).
- National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Crime in India Report (Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India 2022).
- Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, AIR 1996 SC 922.
- Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, (2019) 2 SCC 703.
- Rekha Murarka v. State of West Bengal, (2020) 2 SCC 474.
- Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086.
