Victim Dignity as a Constitutional Principle

Q1. What is the Phaltan case and why is it important beyond the crime itself?

1. The Phaltan case is significant not only because of the offence involved, but because it exposed how victims are treated within the criminal justice process.
2. The focus shifted from merely identifying guilt to examining whether the victim’s privacy, respect, and emotional well-being were protected.
3. Why it matters:
   1. Highlights institutional insensitivity
   2. Raises questions about victim treatment during investigation and trial
   3. Shows that justice is also about process, not only outcome
4. Modern justice theory views crime as harm to individuals, not just violation of law.
5. The Phaltan case brings this human dimension into focus.

Q2. Why is “victim’s dignity” emerging as a core principle in criminal justice?

1. Victim dignity is central because criminal justice today is moving beyond punishment toward human-centred justice.
2. Dignity ensures that victims are not re-traumatised by the system meant to protect them.
3. Key elements of dignity:
   1. Privacy and confidentiality
   2. Respectful treatment
   3. Emotional and psychological safety
4. Linked to restorative justice, which focuses on healing and recognition of harm. Without dignity, victims may avoid reporting crimes, weakening justice delivery and public trust.

Q3. How is victim dignity constitutionally protected in India?

1. Victim dignity flows directly from Article 21, which guarantees the right to life with dignity.
2. Courts have interpreted this to include privacy, bodily integrity, and emotional well-being.
3. Constitutional implications:
   1. State has a duty to protect victim identity
   2. Investigation must be sensitive and fair
   3. Legal processes should not humiliate victims
4. This reflects substantive due process, where justice is judged not only by legality but also by fairness and human impact.
5. Thus, dignity is a constitutional obligation, not discretionary sympathy.

Q4. What theoretical shift in criminal justice does the Phaltan case reflect?

1. The Phaltan case reflects a shift from an offender-centric model to a balanced justice framework.
2. Traditionally, criminal law prioritised accused rights and procedural safeguards.
3. New approach:
   1. Victims recognised as rights-holders
   2. Justice includes dignity, participation, and protection
   3. Focus on harm, not only guilt
4. This aligns with victimology and restorative justice theory, which argue that ignoring victims weakens justice legitimacy.
5. The case shows India’s gradual transition toward a more inclusive criminal justice philosophy.

Q5. How does victim-centric justice improve governance and rule of law?

1. Victim-centric justice strengthens governance by increasing trust in institutions and encouraging reporting of crimes.
2. When victims feel respected, they cooperate with law enforcement, improving justice outcomes.
3. Governance benefits:
   1. Higher public confidence
   2. Reduced under-reporting of crimes
   3. Stronger institutional legitimacy
4. Rule of law is effective only when citizens believe the system is fair. Victim dignity ensures justice is not merely procedural, but morally credible, reinforcing democratic governance.

Q6. What is secondary victimisation and why is it a systemic concern?

Secondary victimisation occurs when victims suffer additional harm due to institutional behaviour, such as insensitive questioning, public exposure, or prolonged trials.

Why it is serious:

• Discourages crime reporting
• Causes psychological trauma
• Undermines justice delivery

It reflects institutional failure, where the system reproduces harm instead of reducing it. From a public administration perspective, it shows poor service delivery and lack of accountability within state institutions.

7. What institutional reforms are needed to protect victim dignity in India?

1. Protecting victim dignity requires systemic reforms, not just legal provisions.
2. Key reforms needed:
   1. Trauma-sensitive police training
   2. Strict privacy enforcement
   3. Victim support services
   4. Judicial monitoring of victim rights
3. This reflects a move from formal justice to substantive justice, where outcomes are judged by human impact. Institutional reform ensures dignity becomes routine practice, not case-specific exception.

8. Why is victim dignity essential for a democratic justice system?

1. Democracy rests on respect for individual worth.
2. A justice system that humiliates victims weakens constitutional values and public trust.
3. Democratic significance:
   1. Encourages access to justice
   2. Upholds constitutional morality
   3. Reinforces equality before law
4. According to democratic theory, state legitimacy depends on how it treats the most vulnerable.
5. Victim dignity ensures justice is humane, inclusive, and morally authoritative.

Conclusion

The Phaltan case shows that justice without dignity is incomplete. A victim-centred approach strengthens constitutional values, rule of law, and democratic legitimacy.