Why The Supreme Court Is Prioritising Victims In Fraud Cases

The Supreme Court has rejected a plea to consolidate multiple fraud cases, underscoring the importance of a victim-centric approach in the judicial handling of financial crimes and cheating.

Key Points

Supreme Court rejects plea to consolidate 24 fraud cases against a Dubai-based businessman.
The court emphasises the need for a victim-centric approach in fraud and cheating cases.
Previous judgments consolidating FIRs in fraud cases were criticised for being pro-accused.
Each fraud case is distinct due to different victims and defrauded amounts, according to the Supreme Court.
The court questioned the fairness of requiring victims from various locations to travel to Delhi for bail hearings.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea of a Dubai-based businessman seeking consolidation of 24 criminal cases registered in Uttarakhand, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh against him and their transfer to a court in Delhi, observing that a victim-centric judicial approach is the need of the hour.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi trashed the plea filed by one Sameer Agrawal and asked whether the court should give him a red carpet welcome and make the victims of his alleged cheating and fraud run to Delhi to attend the trial for his convenience.

Supreme Court Criticises Pro-Accused Judgments

Taking a swipe at previous apex court judgments which ordered consolidation of FIRs in big fraud cases, the bench said instead of a victim-centric judicial approach, pro-accused judgments were being passed in the name of consolidation of FIR and speedy trial.

Every case of fraud is distinct and separate as the victim and the defrauded amount are different, the bench said, adding that, of course, the accused remains the same.

Victims Of Fraud And The Judicial System

"For investigation, I cannot club the FIRs," the bench said, adding, "such victims of fraud are also invisible victims of the judicial system which did not think about them".

"Is it fair to ask the victims of your crime to come from different places like Karnataka, Bihar and Kerala to come to Delhi to oppose your bail here?" the CJI said.

"You deposit Rs 1,000 crore with the apex court registry and we will give money to victims for their travel and stay in good hotels, then we can consider," the CJI said, adding, "a victim-centric judicial approach is the need of the hour".

Accused Should Surrender First

The bench said that though it was not making any observation on the merits of the case, the accused should first surrender and then seek such reliefs.

"By this consolidation of FIR judgments, we have made a coalition of species of victims in one place. Article 32 is a convenient surrogate for bail, anticipatory bail, etc whereas the purpose is different," Justice Bagchi said on previous verdicts which had allowed consolidation of FIRs in other cases.

Twenty-four criminal cases for offences of fraud and cheating against Agrawal were pending in courts in Uttarakhand, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.

Disclaimer: News content is sourced from the stated source. Headlines, summaries, section headers, and images are automatically generated or selected using AI/algorithms and may not always be fully accurate. Readers are advised to refer to the full article for complete context.