LexSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH versus S. NARASIMHA KUMAR AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A STA TE OF ANDHRA PRADESH v. S. NARASIMHA KUMAR AND ORS. JULY 13, 2006 B [AR[J[TPASAYAT ANDS.H. KAPADIA,JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950: Article 136-Abatement of appeal-Criminal appeal filed by State- C Death of accused during pendency of appeal-Petition by his wife stating that appeal against him abated-Held, appeal stands abated as regards deceased accused-Principles regarding abatement of appeal by special leave on death of accused/appellant as indicated in Bondada Gajapathi Rao's** case reiterated. D Respondent No. 3 in Criminal Appeals No. 1446-1450/2001 faced trial as A-3 alongwith other accused for offences punishable, inter alia, under ss. 120-B and 414 IPC. The trial court convicted the accused. They filed revision petitions before the High Court. The revision petition filed by A-3 was numbered as Criminal. Revision No. 1424 of2001. The High Court acquitted E all the accused. During the pendency of the appeals before the Supreme Court, A-3 died. His wife filed the present petition stating that on the death of the respondent (A-3), the appeal against him abated. F Disposing of the petition, the Court HELD: I.I. Counsel for the parties conceded that neither in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, nor in the Supreme Court Rules, there is any provision which deals with such a situation. However, as was held in Harnam Singh 's* case, in the interest of uniformity, there is no valid reason for applying to appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution a set of rules G different from those which govern appeals under the Code in the matter of abatement. (528-D; 530-D-EI H *Harnam Singh v. The State of Himachal Pradesh, 1197513 SCC 343, relied on. 526 STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHv. S NARASIMHA KUMAR[PASA YAT,J.] 527 1.2. In view of the decisions** of this Court, the appeal filed by the State A so far it questions correctness of the judgment in Criminal Revision No. 1424 of2001 stands abated on the death of the respondent (A-3). The cause title shall indicate the applicant's name to avoid confusion. 1532-F-GI **Bondada Gajapalhi Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR (1964) SC 1645 and Harnam Singh v. The S/ale of Himachal Pradesh, 119751 3 SCC B 343, relied on. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2335/2005. IN Criminal Appeal Nos. 1446-1450 of2004. c From the Judgment and Order dated 21.3.2003 of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Criminal Revision Case Nos. D 1415, 1418, 1419, 1424and 1430/2001. D. Bharathi Reddy for the Appellant. G. Ramakrishna Prasad, Dr. K.P. Kyalasanath, Mohd. Wasay Khan, Suyodhan Byrapancni, Venkat Subramaniam, S. Srinivasan, K. Maruthi Rao, E K. Radha, Anjani Aiyagari, R.V. Kameshwaran and T.N. Rao for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. This petition has been filed by wife ofone D.V. F Chandrasekhar who was accused no.3 in C.C. No.53/l990 and was respondent no.3 in the appeal. It is to be noted that the appeal has been filed against the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court disposing of seYeral Criminal Revision petitions. All those revision petitions related to the judgment of the Court of the G VII Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur in C.C. No.53 of 1990. The accused persons are described as A-1, A-2, A-3 etc. A- I was charged with offences punishable under Sections 381, 411and120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short' IPC'); A-2 to A- I I and A-15 were charged with offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 414 I.P.C. A-12 to A-14 were charged with offence H punishable under Section 411 l.P.C. A-4 died during the trial of the case. The 528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. A case against A- I 0 was separated. Through its Judgment dated 26.11.2000 the trial Court convicted the above said accused persons for the offences alleged against .them and awarded sentences of various descriptions. The High Court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed in respect of the concerned respondents. In the appeal as noted above, the B deceased D.V. Chandrasekhar who was A-3 is the respondent in the Criminal Appeal relating to Criminal Revision no.1424 of 200 I. The applicant has filed the present appeal stating that on the death of the said respondent the appeal abated so far he is concerned. The logic of Section 394 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.