Disposed

Dilip Mahato v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Aug 2016Cr.A(SJ)/253/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment addresses the abatement of a criminal appeal after the appellant's death. The court observed that while no application for leave to continue was filed under Section 394 Cr.P.C. by the relatives, the advocate on record was allowed to represent the appellant. Consequently, the imprisonment and fine were set aside, and the appeal was disposed of on the ground of abatement.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed to abate. The sentence of imprisonment and the fine were set aside.

Dilip Mahato Vs State of Jharkhand — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 253 of 2003

¶3

Dilip Mahato S/o Shree Pati Mahato Resident of Village-Bankati ( Jortand) P.S.- Rajnagar, District-Saraikella-Kharsawan

¶4

... ....Appellant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The State of Jharkhand ....Respondent

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

¶8

For the Appellant: Mr. H.K. Mahato, Advocate For the Resp/State: APP

¶9

07/Dated: 11 th August,2016:

¶10

At the very out set, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. H.K. Mahato, submits that appellant has died and the appeal may be abated. There is also a report from the ASI, Rajnagar Police Station, Saraikella-Kharsawan that Dilip Mahato son of Pati Mahto, who is a convict, in relation to S.T. No. 179 of 2002, G.R. No. 397 of 2002 had died. He has also attached the death certificate no. 08/2012-A-508653 of the Department of Planning and Development, Government of Jhrkhand dated 15.06.2012. This report has been addressed to the Assistant Registrar, Jharkhand High Court.

¶11

The appellant, Dilip Mahato was convicted by the court of A.D.J. ( F.T.C.) Seraikella in S.T. No. 179 of 2002, by order dated 01.02.2003 for the offences punishable under sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code with a sentence of R.I. for three years with a fine of Rs. 500 and R.I. for seven years with a fine of Rs. 1000 respectively, both the sentences to run concurrently and in default of payment of fine, he will have go undergo imprisonment for one year.

¶12

Proviso to sub section 2 of section 394 Cr. P. C. reads as under:-

¶13

(2) Every other appeal under this Chapter ( except an appeal from a sentence of fine) shall finally abate on the death of the appellate:

¶14

Provided that where the appeal is against a conviction and sentence of death or of imprisonment, and the appellant dies during the pendency of the appeal, any of his near relatives may, within thirty days of the death of the appellant, apply to the Appellate Court for leave to continue the appeal; and if leave is granted, the appeal shall not abate.”

¶15

According to the proviso, there is an obligation to file an application for continuation of the appeal cast upon the family or relatives of such appellant. However, if no such application is filed

¶16

-2-

¶17

within the time prescribed then this Court can decide the appeal.

¶18

In the present case, no application has been filed by the family or relatives of the appellant. Accordingly, advocate Mr. H.K. Mahto is allowed to represent him and he is anyway also the advocate on record in the appeal. Regarding the sentence of imprisonment ranging from three years and seven years which were to run concurrently and in default of fine further sentence of one year imprisonment, in view of the death of the appellant, the said imprisonment abates. Regarding the fine of Rs. 1500/-, since the main order of imprisonment has abated, it may not be necessary to continue with the order imposing fine of Rs. 1500/- and accordingly, set aside.

¶19

Accordingly, the appeal abates. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶20

( Ratnaker Bhengra,J.)

¶21

Sharda/-

Dilip Mahato v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Mahato v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kutka Mian Murla Mian Vs State of Jharkhand

Saryu Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Prabhat Kumar and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Rajan Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Charan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Chamu Karmakar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Kutka Mian  Murla Mian Vs State of Jharkhand

Saryu Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Prabhat Kumar and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Rajan Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Charan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Chamu Karmakar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Kutka Mian Murla Mian Vs State of Jharkhand