The victims had many rights in ancient period whether in India or in Europe and they used to play a crucial role in legal system. During the Muslim period, victims also enjoyed significant rights and most of the Mugal Emperors tried their level best to impart the justice to victims but in counterpart, victims lost their power with the emergence of the state in Europe. The plight of victims in ‘Adversarial System’ became worse and they became forgotten people except their minor role in criminal justice system. Thus, reparation aspect became subordinate, and punitive role of the State became a dominate factor in the administration of criminal justice. The victim was finally neglected and left to his own fate and has been reduced to the level of a piece of evidence, who had to co-operate with the prosecuting   agency, knowing fully well that he has nothing to gain except suffering and harassment. It was believed that the claim of the victim was sufficiently satisfied by the conviction and sentencing of the offender. This assumption is neither fair nor just. Justice demands that when society and the State are resorting to every possible measure of correction and rehabilitation of criminals, equal concern must be shown for the victims by at least providing compensation to them for the loss, agony, physical and mental torture, they suffer.[1]
        However, India is still far behind in the development of victim’s rights and their role in present legal justice system. They are still treated as if they are responsible for own fate. In contrast to it, our Apex Court has interpreted the provision of Article 21 liberally and provided many basic rights to the accused[2]. In case the accused is found guilty he is punished and kept in prison with object of reforming him. Courts have from time to time directed the state authorities to provide all necessary facilities and ensure that human rights of criminals are not violated[3]....