CHHANABHAI PUNJABHAI PRAJAPATI Vs. KANUJI VISAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Chhanabhai Punjabhai Prajapati, the original complainant, who is now no more, being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19/05/1983, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narol, in Criminal Case No. 907 of 1982, had preferred the present Revision Application. By the impugned order of acquittal, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted the respondent-accused for the offence under Secs. 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The present Revision Application was filed through Mr. Justice J. M. Panchal, when he was an Advocate.

(2.) . On elevation of Mr. Justice Panchal to the Bench, a notice was caused to issue to the petitioner informing him that his Advocate has become the High Court Judge and as such he should appoint another Advocate in the matter or to remain present before the Court, etc. The notice could not be served on the petitioner. It is now reported that the petitioner has died on 24/03/1991. Necessary death certificate is produced along with the statement of the son of the petitioner stating, inter alia, that the petitioner died on 24/03/1991.

(3.) . The question arose whether the present revision application would abate due to death of the petitioner. Section 394 of the Code of Criminal Procedure relates to abatement of appeals. It provides that every appeal under Sec. 377 or Sec. 378 shall finally abate on the death of the accused. Every other appeal, except an appeal from a sentence of fine, shall finally abate on the death of the appellant, provided that where the appeal is against a conviction and sentence of death or imprisonment, and the appellant dies during the pendency of the appeal, any of his near relative may, within thirty days of the death of the appellant, apply to the appellate Court for leave to continue the appeal and if leave is granted, the appeal shall not abate.