2025 (2) TMI 412 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonour of cheque - death of accused during pendency of the Revisional application preferred against conviction and sentence of compensation would be abated automatically or not - compensation and fine are similar and the said amount as imposed by the Court is to be recoverable from the estate of the deceased - HELD THAT - There is no definition of fine stipulated in the CrPC but there is a provision to allow fine while convicting the accused person in view of the Indian Penal Code. Even no compensation is defined either in CrPC or IPC. The present proceeding is initiated under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 and whenever a person is convicted under the said sections there is a provision to sentence of imprisonment as well as fine but in the present case both the Learned Courts below awarded compensation to be paid by the accused to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 12 Lakhs. Actually compensation is granted to address the suffering caused by any loss or injury resulting from an act for which the accused has been sentenced. While it establishes criminal liability the compensation awarded to the victim is treated similarly to what could be granted in a civil suit. As for accused herein no fine was imposed on him; instead he was directed to pay compensation. In the light of the provisions contained in Sections 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 fine amount as imposed by the Court is to be recovered by sale and auction of the property of the accused; whereas as per Section 431 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 even amount of compensation can be recovered as if it was a fine. In the instant case compensation was directed to be paid by the accused persons. Therefore as per both sections 421 and 431 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 amount is to be recovered by way of auction and sale of the property of the late accused/petitioner no. 3 namely Goutam Gupta. The legal heirs and representatives of the deceased did not prefer any application for substitution themselves as the petitioners in place of deceased Goutam Gupta. Therefore the present Opposite Party No. 2 filed an application for substitution of legal heirs and representatives of the deceased Goutam Gupta. Therefore the case of the petitioners would not abate for the death of petitioner no. 3 (since deceased) namely Goutam Gupta as the sentence includes the compensation. Conclusion - i) The case would not abate for the death of the petitioner. ii) The registry is directed to take necessary steps to substitute the legal heirs and representatives in the Revisional application. Application allowed.

Summary

The judgment by the Calcutta High Court involved a Criminal Revisional application regarding the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioners in a case under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The key issues considered by the Court were whether the death of an accused during the pendency of a Revisional application would abate the case automatically, and whether compensation and fine are similar in nature and recoverable from the estate of the deceased.The Court noted that the accused persons were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs. 12,00,000 to the complainant. The Court highlighted that compensation is granted to address the suffering caused by an act for which the accused has been sentenced, similar to what could be granted in a civil suit. The Court distinguished between fine and compensation, stating that fine constitutes a liability on the estate of the deceased, while compensation is a legal right to be paid to the victim.The Court referred to legal precedents and established principles that an appeal or revision from the sentence of fine does not abate upon the death of the appellant/convict, as fine is recoverable from the estate of the deceased. The Court emphasized that compensation can also be recovered from the estate of the deceased, as per the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Penal Code.In this case, the Court allowed the application for substitution of the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased petitioner, as the sentence included compensation. The Court held that the case would not abate for the death of the petitioner, and directed the registry to take necessary steps to substitute the legal heirs and representatives in the Revisional application.Overall, the judgment clarified the distinction between fine and compensation, affirmed the recoverability of both from the estate of the deceased, and allowed for the continuation of the case against the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased petitioner.