PRANAB KUMAR MITRA versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANOTHER

Citation: [1959] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 63 · Decided: 03-10-1958 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHI RANJAN DAS, NATWARLAL HARILAL BHAGWATI, BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA, K. SUBBA RAO, K.N. WANCHOO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

(1) S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
63 
PRAN AB KUMAR MITRA 
v. 
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
AND ANOTHER 
(S. R. DAS 0. J., BHAGW ATI, B. P. SINHA, 
SuBBA RAo and K. N. WANOHOO JJ.) 
Criminal 
Revision~Death of ·petitioner pending hearing-
Application by legal representative to be added as party-Power of 
High Court-If can consider legality of conviction-Code of Crimi-
nal Procedure (Act V of z898), ss .. 439, 435, 43I. 
There is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure 
which limits the wide discretionary power conferred on the High 
Court by s. 439 read with s. 435 of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of 
any finding, sentence or order passed by an inferior Court and, 
where it chooses to interfere either suo motu or at the instance of 
a party, it has thereunder the power, in the ends of justice, not 
only to bring the legal representative of a deceased party on 
record but also to consider the legality of the order of conviction 
even when the sentence inflicted may be a composite one of 
imprisonment and fine. 
Imperatrix v. Dongaji Andaji, (1878) I.L.R. 2 Born. 564, 
approved. 
In re Nabishah, (1894) I.L.R. 19 Born. 714, considered. 
Consequently, in a case where the accused petitioner, who 
was convicted under s. 420 of the Indian Penal Code a.nd sentenc-
ed to suffer one day's imprisonment, which really meant deten-
tion till the rising of the Court on the day the order was 
pronounced, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to 
suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months, died during the 
pendency of the revision case in the High Court and his son 
applied to be substituted as a party in order that he could 
challenge the order of conviction and sentence and the High 
Court,.holding that the principle of s. 431 of the Code of Crimi-
nal Procedure applied, added him as a party but refused to 
consider the legality of the o;rder of conviction and reduced the 
sentence. 
Held, that the High Court was in error in limiting its powers 
under s. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the analogy 
of s. 431 of the Code, which in terms did not apply to a revision 
case, and its decision must be set aside. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION:-
Criminal 
Appeal No. 116 of 1956. 
October 3. 
64 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1959] Supp .. 
r95a 
Appeal from the Judgment and order dated Decem-
ber 22, 1955, of the Calcutta High Court in Cnminal 
Pranrlb Kumar 
Mitra 
Revision No .. 714 of 1955, arising out of the judgment 
v. 
and order dated May 9, 1955, of the Court of the 
Th• State of w.,1 Additional Sessions Judge at Ali pore in Criminal 
Beng•l c;. Another Appeal No. 97 of 1955. 
Sinha j. 
0. P. Lal, for the a j]pellant. 
H. J. Umrigar and R. H. Dhebar, for the respon-
dents. 
· 
1958. October 3. 
The Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
SINHA J.-The simple question for determination in 
this appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the 
High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, is whether a 
pending application in revision made under s. 439 of 
the Code of Criminal Procedure (to be referred · to 
hereinafter as the Code), finally abates on the death of 
the petitioner in the High Court, and if so, to what 
extent. 
It is not necessary to set out, in detail, the facts of 
the prosecution case and the evidence upon which the 
findings of the courts of fact were based, except to 
state that the appellant's father, Sailendra Sundar 
i\Iitra, was tried and convicted by a MagiHtrate of the 
first class, at Alipore. The Appellate Court has set 
out the case against the accused in these words : " The 
charge against the accused was that on the 2nd 
December; 1946, at Garden Reach, the accused, being 
an employee as Establishment Clerk of B. C. II Section 
in the Traffic Accounts Office of B. N. Railway (now 
Eastern Railway), cheated the said B. N. Railway 
Administration by dishonestly inducing it by means 
of false representation in the pay bill of the non-gazet-
ted staff for November, 1946, to deliver to him Rs. 
205-13-0 and to one Satish Chandra Das Gupta, a 
clerk in the said B. C. II Section, Rs. 33-4-0 in excess 
of legitimate dues, and thereby committed an offence 
punishable under section 420, I.P.C." The learned 
trial Magistrate convicted the accused person for 
cheating in respect of Rs. 205-13-0, but gave him the 
benefit of the doubt in respect of the sum of Rs. 33-4-0 
J 
.I 
(1) s.c:R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
65 
claimed on behalf of another person,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.