LALAY THOMAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can an accused be 'acquitted under Sec. 256(1) of the Code Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short), if legal heir of deceased complainant remains absent Can legal heir of deceased complainant be treated as "complainant", for the purpose of Sec. 256(1) of the Code

(2.) Appellant's husband filed a complaint against respondents 2 to 4, before Magistrate Court, alleging offence under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. During pendency of trial, complainant died. The Court did not acquit accused under Sec. 256(1) of the Code. But prosecution continued since his widow, who is his legal heir filed an application and prosecution continued. Thu case was posted for evidence. On 14.7.2010, deceased complainant's widow was absent and Trial Court acquitted accused, under Sec. 256(1) of Code, recording that "complainant was continuously absent".

(3.) Heard both sides. Perused the available records. It is seen from the impugned order under Sec. 256(1) of the Code that Trial Court acquitted accused since legal heir of deceased complainant was absent, stating that "complainant" was continuously absent. Thus, acquittal order was passed, treating legal heir of deceased complainant, as "complainant".