The single bench held that the appeal abated under Section 394 CrPC as the appellant died during pendency and his legal representatives chose not to continue the appeal.
The appeal was abated and the matter was dismissed following the death of the appellant and lack of instruction from legal representatives to continue.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 800 of 2000
------Appellant
VERSUS
------- Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Shantam Awasthi, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Praveen Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer
Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER
06/09/2022
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge
P a w a n
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal stands liable for abatement upon the death of the appellant during pendency.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajeet Singh
State of Madhyapradesh, through C.B.I., Jabalpur
Parth Prateem Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
