Criminal justice system must adopt a more victim-centric approach: SC

• Supreme Court (May 2026) held that India's criminal justice system, historically accused-centric, must shift toward a victim-centric approach — made while refusing to club multi-state FIRs against an accused in a chit fund fraud [1].
• Highlights the tension between procedural convenience for the accused (single trial) and substantive justice for dispersed victims across jurisdictions [1].
• Directly ties into the 2023 criminal law overhaul (BNSS replacing CrPC), which formally embeds victim compensation, witness protection and victim participation provisions [3].
• High-value for GS-II (Polity/Governance) and GS-IV (Ethics) — tests understanding of jurisprudential shift + statutory reform.

2. Why in the News

• On Thursday, 21 May 2026, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court — CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi — refused to club FIRs registered across multiple States against Upendra Nath Mishra, accused in a multi-hundred-crore chit fund scam involving Micro Finance Limited, probed by the CBI [1].
• CJI Surya Kant orally remarked that criminal law jurisprudence has been "accused-centric" and that "victims have always been pushed into a corner" [1].
• The Bench held each overt act of cheating/inducement creates independent territorial jurisdiction, rejecting the accused's plea (via Sr. Adv. Aman Lekhi) to consolidate FIRs from Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa and Andhra Pradesh into one trial [1].
• CJI Surya Kant separately termed fraud victims "invisible victims of the judicial system" in remarks on cybercrime, reinforcing the same theme [2].

3. Background & Evolution

• Indian criminal procedure historically centred on the rights of the accused (right to fair trial, bail, defence) under the CrPC, 1973, with victims largely reduced to witnesses/complainants.
• 2008 CrPC Amendment introduced Section 357A (victim compensation schemes) — first formal statutory recognition of victim rights.
• Justice J.S. Verma Committee (2013), constituted post-Nirbhaya, recommended Rape Crisis Cells, time-bound victim updates on investigation, and a compensation corpus for victims of crimes against women [3].
• 2023 criminal law reforms: CrPC, IPC and Indian Evidence Act replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) — BNSS retains and expands victim compensation, witness protection scheme provisions, and victim's right to be heard [3].
• May 2026: SC's chit fund FIR-clubbing order is the latest judicial articulation of this victim-centric philosophy, extending it beyond sexual-offence victims to economic/financial fraud victims.

4. Core Static Facts

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

• Marks judicial recognition that Article 21 (right to life/fair trial) must be read to include victims' right to justice, not just accused's right to fair trial [1].
• Reinforces principle that territorial jurisdiction under CrPC/BNSS is tied to place of occurrence of each offence, not administrative convenience of the accused [1].

Social

• Chit fund/Ponzi frauds disproportionately harm poor, low-income depositors — CJI's remark "you have taken money from poor people" underscores class dimension of financial crime victimhood [1].
• Highlights need for victim support beyond sexual offences — extending victim-centrism to economic offence victims, a category often overlooked.

Administrative

• Multi-state FIRs against a single accused create coordination burden for CBI/state police, and litigation costs for scattered victims attending trials in different states — the flip side of denying consolidation.
• Raises implementation question: how do victim compensation/participation provisions under BNSS get operationalised uniformly across states.

Governance / Ethical

• Judicial philosophy shift from "presumption of innocence protects accused" to also weighing "restorative justice for victims" — an ethics-of-justice balancing question directly relevant to GS-IV.
• Tests separation of procedural expediency (single trial, judicial economy) vs. substantive fairness (victim access to justice).

Historical

• Traces a trajectory from CrPC 1973 (accused-focused) → 2008 amendment (Sec 357A) → Justice Verma Committee 2013 → BNSS 2023 → SC's 2026 oral observations — a cumulative institutional shift [3].

6. Recent Developments (last 12-18 months)

• 21 May 2026: SC Bench led by CJI Surya Kant refuses FIR clubbing in chit fund case, calls for victim-centric criminal justice [1].
• CJI Surya Kant has separately made victim-centric remarks in the context of cybercrime, calling fraud victims "invisible victims of the judicial system" [2].
• Continued rollout/implementation of BNSS, BNS, BSA (in force since 1 July 2024) across states, embedding victim compensation and participation mechanisms structurally [3].

7. Prelims Hooks

• SC's victim-centric observation (May 2026) arose in a chit fund fraud case, not a sexual-offence case.
• CJI at the time of ruling: Surya Kant.
• Bench strength: three judges (Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi, Vipul M. Pancholi).
• Investigating agency in the case: CBI.
• Accused/petitioner: Upendra Nath Mishra.
• Legal principle affirmed: each overt act of conspiracy creates independent territorial jurisdiction.
• States where FIRs were filed: Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Andhra Pradesh (7 states).
• First statutory victim compensation provision in India: Section 357A, CrPC (2008 amendment).
• Committee recommending Rape Crisis Cells and victim compensation corpus: Justice J.S. Verma Committee (2013).
• CrPC, 1973 has been replaced by Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
• IPC has been replaced by Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
• Indian Evidence Act has been replaced by Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023.
• New criminal codes (BNS, BNSS, BSA) came into force from 1 July 2024.
• CJI Surya Kant's phrase describing fraud victims: "invisible victims of the judicial system."

8. Mains Relevance

• GS-II: Polity & Governance — Judiciary, Structure/organisation of Judiciary, Statutory bodies, Government policies for vulnerable sections.
• GS-II: Indian Constitution — Article 21, fair trial jurisprudence.
• GS-IV: Ethics — restorative vs. retributive justice, ethical dimensions of governance.
• Possible Mains stems:
• "The Indian criminal justice system has traditionally been accused-centric. Discuss the Supreme Court's recent observations calling for a victim-centric approach and examine how the BNSS, 2023 seeks to operationalise this shift." (GS-II)
• "Critically examine the balance between an accused's right to a fair, consolidated trial and a victim's right to access to justice, in the context of multi-state economic offences." (GS-II/GS-IV)
• "Victim compensation and participation are essential pillars of restorative justice. Evaluate India's legal framework in this regard." (GS-II)

9. Related Topics to Study Next

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — the statutory vehicle carrying forward victim-centric provisions.
• Justice Verma Committee, 2013 — foundational recommendations on victim rights and crimes against women.
• Section 357A CrPC / victim compensation schemes — direct precursor mechanism.
• Chit Fund frauds & Ponzi schemes regulation — SEBI/RBI regulatory angle, Chit Funds Act 1982.
• Zero FIR & e-FIR provisions under BNSS — related procedural reforms affecting victim access.
• Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 — complementary victim/witness-centric reform.
• CBI — jurisdiction, mandate, autonomy debates — investigating agency angle in multi-state economic offences.
• Restorative justice theory — theoretical/ethics linkage for GS-IV.

10. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Do not confuse this case with sexual assault victim rights cases — this SC observation arose in an economic/financial fraud (chit fund) context.
• Don't misattribute the new criminal codes: BNS replaces IPC, BNSS replaces CrPC, BSA replaces Evidence Act — commonly swapped by aspirants.
• The Justice Verma Committee (2013) is post-Nirbhaya and criminal-law-focused; do not confuse with Justice Malimath Committee (2003), which also recommended victim-centric criminal justice reforms and is a distinct, older report often tested together.
• CJI in this case is Surya Kant — verify against the current CJI at exam time, as this rotates.
• Investigating agency is CBI, not state police — despite FIRs being state-registered.