Bombay High Court Upholds Victim's Right to Seek Addition of Accused in Criminal Case
Aurangabad Bench affirms trial court's jurisdiction to add accused based on evidence, dismisses petition challenging victim's revision application.
In a significant ruling on October 7, 2025, the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court upheld the right of a victim to file a revision application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The case concerned Prashant Bhausaheb Patil, who challenged the inclusion of his name as an accused in a criminal case after the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhule, initially rejected the prosecution's application to add him.
The petitioner, Prashant Bhausaheb Patil, argued that he was not involved in the crime and was present at his workplace during the alleged incident. He further contended that the informant, being the victim, did not have the standing to file a revision application, which should have been the prerogative of the state.
However, Justice Sushil M. Ghodeswar observed that the victim, as the informant, has unbridled participatory rights throughout the legal proceedings, including the right to challenge orders through revision applications. The court emphasized that this right ensures the victim's active involvement in the pursuit of justice.
The judgment reiterated the trial court's authority under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. to add any person as an accused if evidence presented during the trial suggests their involvement, irrespective of their initial exclusion from the charge sheet. The court dismissed the contention that the Investigating Officer's satisfaction should determine the rejection of such applications.
The bench referenced the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Omi @ Omkar Rathore v. State of Madhya Pradesh, which underscores the trial court's jurisdiction to add accused persons based on evidence adduced during the trial.
Justice Ghodeswar also clarified that the burden of proof regarding the alibi lies with the accused, as per Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, now Section 109 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. The court noted that this issue could not be deliberated upon at the revision stage.
In light of these considerations, the court dismissed Prashant Patil's petition, confirming the Additional Sessions Judge's decision to allow the revision application and proceed with the trial against him. This judgment reinforces the participatory rights of victims in criminal proceedings and the discretionary powers of trial courts in managing accused lists based on emerging evidence.
Bottom Line:
Victim, being informant, has a legally vested right to prefer a revision application under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. against the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class rejecting an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to add an accused - The trial court is empowered to add any person as accused during trial based on evidence adduced, even if the person was not charge-sheeted.
Statutory provision(s):
- - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 319
- - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 397
- - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Section 106 (Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Section 109)
