HARNAM SINGH versus THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Citation: [1975] 2 S.C.R. 823 · Decided: 21-11-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
c 
D 
E 
G 
H 
HARNAM SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH 
November 21, 1974 
[Y. V. CHANDRACHUD AND P. N. BHAGWATI, JJj 
823 
Code oj Criminal Prot·edure, 1898, S1:ctlon 431-"every 
oilier 
appeal", 
meaning of-Abatement of appeals on d~at/i of accused-Prol'i.1ion for collll· 
nuance of appeal from sentence of fine after dea:h of accused-Composite order 
of senl<nce combining substantive imprisonment with 
fine, 
if appeal 
from 
sentence of fine. 
Cu11stitwio11 of India, 1950, Article 136-Crimi11al Appeal-Widow of the 
deceasul appe//a111, if can be brought 011 record 
as legal ·representative of 
<iecea~ed appellant. 
In September 1967, the appellant was working as a Patwari in Halqua Pa:li. 
On the 19th of that month on~ N asked for copies of the rcvenu: record. The 
appellan~ said that the copies will not be supplied unless a hush-pa:yment of 
Rs. 30/. wa·s made. N borrowed Rs. 30/- from a friend and on the 20th he 
lodged his complaint with the Anti·corruption Department. Sub-Inspector K. 
obtained p·ermission from a Mandi Magistrate to investiga:te the offence and 
laid the trap. The raiding party went to the appellant's office where the com· 
plainant N is al'e~d to have given the marked currency notes of Rs. 30 /· to 
the app·ellant. The appellant was prosecuted before the 
Special Judge who 
rejected his ddence that the sum of R'>. 30 /· was not found from his person 
but was fou,nd from a residential room where it wa~ planted ·by the ~omplainant. 
The. SpeCial Judge convicted the appellant under section 5(1) (d) read with 
Section 5(2) of. the Prevention :6f Corruption Act as also 1r.idcr 8CC. 1.61 of 
the P~ne-1 Code, and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two 
years alld to pay a fine of .Rs: 300/· .. The High Court to whii:h he preferred 
an appeal, confirmed the conviction but ~:duced the S\lbstantive sentence to one 
year. This appeal was by special leave granted under Article 136 of the Con· 
sti!lltion. During the pendency of this appeaI the appellant died and his widow 
was brought on the record as his legal representative. 
It was contended that .(i) the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed 
on the appellant came to an end with his death and . therefore the appeal in 
rega.rd to that sentence stands abated; (ii)"So far as the sentence of fine is 
;:oncerned, since the deceased appellant was not sentenced to pay a fine only 
bu.t was punished with a composite sentence of imprisonment and fine. the 
appeal would abate as regards the fine also; and (iii) at any rate, even if the 
sentence of fine could be set aside, the order of conviction and substantive 
sentence must remain. 
Allowing the ~ppeal, 
HELD·. ( i) and (ii) Chapter XXX! of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 
1898, called "Of Appeals" contains provisions governing appeals. Se:tion 431 
of the Code imcr a/ia provides that every appeal under section 411 A, sub-sec. 
(2), or section 417 shall finally abate on the death of the a,:cused and every 
other appt:al under the Chapter (except an a.ppeal from a sentence of fine) 
shall finally abate on the death of the appellant. 
By "every other appeal" is 
meant an appeal ·other than one against an order of acquittal that is to say, 
an appeal against an order of conviction. It is true that an appeal from a 
composite ·order of s~ntence is ordinarily directed aga:inst both the substantive 
imprisonment a·nd the fine. 
B·ut, such an appeal does not for tiJat reason cease 
to be an appeal from a sentence of fine. It is something more not ·less than 
an appeal from a sentence of fine ·only and it is significant that the parenthetj.;al 
clause of section 431 does not contain the word "only". To limit the operation 
of the exception contained in that clause so as to take away from its pu.rview · 
appeals directed both against imprisonment and fine is to read into. the clause 
824 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1975] 2 §.C.R. 
the word "only" which is not there and .which by no technique of interpretation 
may be read there. All that is necessary is that a sentence of fine should 
have been imposed on the accused anci the appeal filed by him. should involve 
the consideration of the validity of that sentence. The deceased appellant's 
widow who was brought on the record as his legal representative is, therefore, 
entitled to prosecute the appeal, because the sentence of fine directly affocts 
the property which would devolve on her cin the death of her husband. [826C-
827F] 
. 
(ii

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.