2019 (8) TMI 1811 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - non-prosecution - acquittal of accused - section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT - The record proceedings clearly indicates that the complaint came to be dismissed for non-prosecution as the complainant was not available. The record proceedings also indicates that the complainant died on 24.01.2016, whereas the order came to be passed on 22.03.2017. This Court is of the considered opinion to quash and set aside the judgment and order - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Appeal challenging judgment and order acquitting the respondent accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to the death of the original complainant.
- Interpretation of legal provisions regarding abatement of proceedings in case of death of the complainant.
- Right of legal heirs to continue with the complaint after the death of the original complainant.
- Quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of the trial court.

Analysis:

1. Appeal Challenging Judgment and Order:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order passed by the trial court acquitting the respondent accused in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The original complainant had filed the complaint, but after the complainant's death, the trial court dismissed the complaint for non-prosecution, leading to the appeal by the son of the deceased complainant.

2. Interpretation of Legal Provisions on Abatement:
The judgment cited the decision in Anil G. Shah vs. J. Chitranjan and Co., emphasizing that the death of the complainant does not automatically abate the proceedings. It was highlighted that once the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offense, the trial must continue following due process, and there is no provision for abatement solely due to the complainant's death. Legal heirs have the right to step in and proceed with the complaint, as established by various High Court judgments.

3. Right of Legal Heirs to Continue the Complaint:
The High Court acknowledged the principle established in the cited case and held that the legal heir of the deceased complainant has the right to continue with the complaint. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the trial court's judgment and order, granting liberty to the legal representative to file an application for substitution within a specified period. The trial court was directed to consider the application and proceed in accordance with the law.

4. Quashing and Setting Aside Judgment and Order:
Based on the interpretation of the legal provisions and the rights of legal heirs, the High Court allowed the appeal, thereby overturning the trial court's decision to acquit the respondent accused. The court's decision emphasized the importance of allowing the legal heirs to continue the legal proceedings in such cases, ensuring that justice is served even after the death of the original complainant.