A KRISHNA REDDY Vs. ARIPIREDDY INDRAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question arises in this case. One Aripireddy Savithramma filed a complaint against eight persons including her husband alleging that he married another lady by name Sumitra, i.e., A-2 and that the other accused abetted the offence punishable under Section 494, I.P.C. Some witnesses were examined. While the trial of the case was in progress, the complainant died on 9-1-1982. Her minor daughter Aripireddy Indiravati, aged seven years, represented by her maternal uncle Settipalle Narayana Reddy (brother of late Aripireddy Savithramma) filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 57 of 1982 seeking permission to continue the proceedings against all the accused. The learned Magistrate, after considering the rival contentions, allowed the petition and permitted the minor daughter represented by her maternal uncle to continue the proceedings. Challenging the said order, the accused in the C.C., have filed this revision.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific provision under the Cr.P.C. to grant such permission to a minor daughter or to any close relation of the deceased complainant to continue the proceedings on the death of the complainant and that, on the other hand, the proceedings abate on the death of the complainant.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent i.e., the minor girl who is permitted to continue the proceedings in the place of the original complainant, submits that, when once the complaint is filed as provided under S. 198, Cr.P.C. the proceedings cannot come to an end and will not abate on the death of the complainant and any one of the relations mentioned under Section 198, Cr.P.C., 1973 can, with the permission of the Court, continue the proceedings.