Legal Provisions of Section 394 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), India.
Abatement of Appeals:
Every appeal against conviction abates on the death of the accused except an appeal from the sentence of fine. The exception in case of sentence of fine is justified because fine constitutes a liability on the estate of the deceased accused and his legal representatives who are entitled to ward off that liability.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Proviso to sub-section (2) enables any of the near relatives of the deceased accused who was convicted and sentenced to death or the life imprisonment, to obtain leave to continue the appeal within specified period of thirty days of the death of the appellant, with a view to get rid of stigma or odium that would otherwise attach with the members of the deceased’s family. If such leave is granted, the appeal shall not abate.
The death of main accused during the pendency of the criminal appeal will abate the appeal against him alone and not against the other co-accused persons. Thus the appeal would not be rendered infructuous with regard to other accused persons.
Image Source : luna.edu
In the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. Narasimha Kumarthe High Court had set aside the conviction and sentence in respect of respondents. On special leave to appeal, there was death of one of respondents before grant of leave, to appeal. The appeal stood abated as regards the deceased respondent.
In Girija Prasad (deceased) through his Legal Representative (widowed wife) v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the accused (dead) was charged for an offence under Sections 5 and 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 read with Section 161, IPC (both of which now stand repealed) for taking a bribe of Rs. 500/- as he was caught taking it red-handed through a trap.
The accused had been acquitted by the Sessions Court but on appeal by the State against his acquittal, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Court and convicted the accused under Section 161, IPC (now repealed) and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for four months and a fine of Rs. 200/-.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The High Court had passed the order of conviction and sentence on April 17, 2002 and the accused died thereafter. The widow of the accused had appealed against the conviction of her deceased husband (accused) so that the stigma cast upon her husband was removed. Though the appeal was filed before the Supreme Court 149 days after the presented time-limit and was barred by limitation, but the Court taking a humanitarian view, condoned the delay under Section 394 (2) and admitted it for hearing.
It must be stated that the principles under Section 394, Cr. P.C. are also applicable to appeals before the Supreme Court. Thus in Shankar Prasad Ghosh v. State of Bihar, the legal heirs filed application for leave to continue appeal on death of appellant after 5 years against the statutorily prescribed period of 30 days for making such application. No explanation was given for the delay. The Supreme Court held that appeal stood abated and declined to go into the question of condonation of delay.