In, G Varagaraju vs Union of India & others, a Single Bench of Karntaka HC while deciding the constitutional validity of section 394(1) read with Section 378(4) of Cr.P.c has held that, the provisions of law such as section 394 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 providing for abatement of proceedings are universal and time tested. The policy of the State as enacted in statutes which provide for the final abatement of appeals on the death of accused are animated with legislative wisdom & logic.
Facts
Petitioner was the complainant in a Cheque Bounce case for an offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After the trial, the same came to be dismissed by the Court vide acquittal order. Petitioner had filed Criminal Appeal against the said order. A Coordinate Bench of this Court disposed off the said appeal as having abated, the respondent-accused having died pendente lite.
Aggrieved by the same, Petitioner filed the writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India praying to declare section 394(1) read with Section 378(4) of Cr.P.c is unconstitutional for want to differentiate the death of accused as before death and after death taking into consideration section 138 & 139 of the N.I Act.
Contention Made
Petitioner: That the provisions of section 394 of Cr.P.c. which provide for abatement of criminal appeals on the death of accused, firstly, do not apply to the Cheque Bounce cases which is governed by N.I Act, 1881.
Further, if the said provisions are held to be applicable, the same are liable to be voided on the ground of being discriminatory & arbitrary.
Respondent: That the said provisions have been there since more than a century in one or the other form and pari materia provisions do obtain in all civilized jurisdictions.
Further, In petition, none from the side of deceased accused, is arrayed as a party. Hence liable to be dismissed.
Court Observation
The Single Bench of Karnataka HC while deciding the constitutional validity of section 394 observed that, the provisions of law such as section 394 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 providing for abatement of proceedings are universal and time tested.
Further Bench observed that, It is a matter of pure legislative policy that death of the accused should put an end to criminal proceedings. Therefore, the said provision cannot be voided.
The Bench while deciding the Second question as in the provisions of 1973 Code do not apply to the trial of cheque bounce cases observed that, Section 4 of the Code r/w Sec. 143 of NI Act makes its provisions applicable to the trial of offences punishable under law other than IPC, 1862 as well.
Court Judgment
The Karnataka HC, while dismissing the petition has held that, it is a matter of legislative policy that in certain circumstances, the criminal proceeding should abate on the death of the accused and further held that the defect in the petition which has not arrayed L.Rs of the deceased accused, against whom petitioner intends to proceeds.
Case: G Varagaraju vs Union of India & others.
Citation: WRIT PETITION NO.13145 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
Bench: Hon’ble Mr Justice Krishna S. DIxit
Decided on: 12thAugust, 2022.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
