1958 (10) TMI 49 - SC - Indian Laws

Issues Involved:
1. Whether a pending application in revision under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure abates on the death of the petitioner.
2. The extent to which a pending revision application survives after the death of the petitioner.
3. The applicability of Section 431 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to criminal revision applications.
4. The discretionary power of the High Court in exercising its revisional jurisdiction after the death of the petitioner.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether a pending application in revision under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure abates on the death of the petitioner:
The core issue in this appeal is whether a pending application in revision under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure abates on the death of the petitioner. The court examined the statutory provisions and judicial precedents to determine the legal position. It was noted that Section 431 of the Code, which deals with the abatement of appeals, does not explicitly apply to revision applications. The court emphasized that the revisional powers of the High Court are discretionary and are intended to ensure justice is served, indicating that such applications do not necessarily abate upon the death of the petitioner.

2. The extent to which a pending revision application survives after the death of the petitioner:
The court held that the High Court has the power to pass orders in its revisional jurisdiction even after the death of the petitioner. The judgment clarified that the High Court's revisional jurisdiction is not limited by the death of the petitioner, especially when the sentence includes a fine which affects the estate of the deceased. The court concluded that the High Court could examine the correctness, legality, or propriety of the conviction and sentence, including the sentence of fine, even after the death of the petitioner.

3. The applicability of Section 431 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to criminal revision applications:
Section 431, which deals with the abatement of appeals, was scrutinized to determine its applicability to criminal revision applications. The court noted that Section 431 explicitly applies to appeals and not to revision applications. The judgment referred to historical legislative intent and judicial precedents, concluding that the absence of a corresponding provision for revision applications indicates that the High Court retains discretion in such matters. The court inferred that the legislative intent was to allow the High Court to exercise its revisional powers based on the specifics of each case.

4. The discretionary power of the High Court in exercising its revisional jurisdiction after the death of the petitioner:
The judgment emphasized that the High Court's revisional powers under Section 439, read with Section 435, are discretionary and are aimed at ensuring justice. The court held that the High Court is not bound to treat a pending revision application as abated due to the death of the petitioner. Instead, the High Court has complete discretion to deal with the matter based on the requirements of justice. The court highlighted that the High Court's revisional jurisdiction allows it to examine the merits of the conviction and sentence, including the sentence of fine, even after the petitioner's death.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, remitting the case to the High Court to be dealt with in accordance with law. The judgment clarified that the High Court has the discretion to continue with a revision application after the death of the petitioner, especially when the sentence includes a fine. The High Court is empowered to examine the merits of the conviction and sentence to ensure justice is served.

← Previous Next →