Virendra v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The Single Judge dismissed the criminal appeal as abated after learning that the appellant had died before the judgment was pronounced, rendering further proceedings useless.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed as abated due to death of the appellant.
What the court decided
Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1105 of 1988
Appellant :- Virendra Respondent :- State Counsel for Appellant :- B.N. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
List has been revised. No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant. Ms. Sushma Soni, learned A.G.A. is present.
Instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgement and order dated 30.4.1988 passed by IX Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No. 156 of 1987 connected with 157 of 1987, convicting the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment a fine of Rs.500/- and also sentencing him to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
Vide order dated 6.5.1988 the present appeal was admitted and notices were directed to be issued. Simultaneously, the appellant was granted bail.
In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar has submitted a report dated 21.2.2019 informing that the sole appellant had died on 1.5.2016. To verify the factum of death of the appellants, he has recorded the statements of Raj Bahadur Maurya (Sub Inspector), Smt. Pramila Sharma (wife of the deceased appellant) and Arun, neighbour of the deceased appellant. Along with the report, he has appended the report of the concerned Police Station, statements of the witnesses and the death certificate issued by the Government of U.P.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Virendra
- respondent
State
Coram
Dinesh Pathak
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/1105/1988
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court