Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
2025 INSC 1484
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 5589-5590 OF 2025
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025)
Syed Shahnawaz Ali …Appellant (s)
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent (s)
J U D G M E N T
MANOJ MISRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These two appeals arise from a common proceeding and are
directed against the orders of the High Court of Madhya
1
Pradesh at Jabalpur dated 21.02.2024 and 31.08.2024
passed in Criminal Revision No. 1986 of 2020 and Misc.
Criminal Case (MCRC) No. 36327 of 2024 respectively.
Facts
3. The father of the appellant, Shamshad Ali, filed an
application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
CHETAN ARORA
Date: 2025.12.19
18:37:37 IST
Reason:
1
The High Court
Page 1 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
2 3
Procedure, 1973 for registering a first information report
against respondents 2 to 5. The said application was allowed,
an FIR was registered and investigated. After investigation,
police report was submitted indicting respondents 2 to 5 for
offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,
4
120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 . However, vide
order dated 07.03.2020, the Court of XVIIth Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhopal, M.P. discharged the accused
respondents from offences punishable under Sections 419,
467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 IPC and directed the trial to
proceed under Section 420 IPC only. Aggrieved by the order
dated 07.03.2020, the father of the appellant (i.e., the
informant) filed Criminal Revision No. 1986 of 2020 before
the High Court.
4. During pendency of the revision, on 05.05.2021 the father of
the appellant i.e., the revisionist died. The appellant, who was
arrayed as a witness in the police report, filed IA No. 19769
of 2021 to continue the revision proceedings. The High Court
by the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 rejected the
2
Cr.P.C.
3
FIR
4
IPC
Page 2 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
application holding that there is no provision for substitution
in a Criminal Revision and, therefore, the Revision would
abate.
5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant filed an
application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha
5
Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) for
recall of the order dated 21.02.2024. This application was
dismissed by the second impugned order dated 31.08.2024.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 21.02.2024 and
31.08.2024, the appellant is before this Court.
Submissions
6. In short, the submission on behalf of the appellant is that the
6
appellant is a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of
Cr.P.C. and is, therefore, entitled to continue the revision
proceedings. In the alternative, it is submitted that a revision
cannot abate. Once the Court entertains a revision, the Court
has to test the legality and propriety of the order impugned
before it. Therefore, the appropriate course for the High Court
5
BNSS
6
Section 2 (wa) of CrPC. – “victim” means a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the
act or omission for which the accused person has been charged and the expression “victim” includes his or her
guardian or legal heir.
Page 3 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
was to decide the matter on merits and for an effective
hearing to allow the appellant’s counsel or an amicus to
assist the Court.
7. On behalf of the State, written submissions have been filed
accepting the rights of a victim to participate in the criminal
justice process.
8. Per contra , on behalf of respondents 2 to 5, it has been
7
contended that Section 394 of Cr.P.C. applies to appeals.
There is no corresponding provision for continuance of a
revision by the legal heirs. No doubt, a victim may file an
appeal but, in absence of an enabling provision, he cannot be
substituted as a revisionist. In such circumstances, the
impugned orders call for no interference.
9. In addition to above, on behalf of respondents 2 to 5, it was
submitted that respondents 2 to 5 were discharged of certain
7
394. Abatement of appeals.
(1) Every appeal under Section 377 or Section 378 shall finally abate on the death of the
accused.
(2) Every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence of fine) shall
finally abate on the death of the appellant : 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.
Explanation. - In this section, "near relative" means a parent, spouse, lineal descendant,
brother or sister.
Page 4 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
offences for cogent reasons which do not suffer from any
perversity or illegality.
Discussion
10. Before we set out to test the correctness of the orders
impugned, it would be useful to first understand the concept
of abatement. In Black’s Law Dictionary abatement has
been described as: (1) the act of eliminating or nullifying; (2)
the suspension or defeat of a pending action for a reason
unrelated to the merits of the claim; (3) the act of lessening
or moderating; diminution in amount or degree; (4) the
reduction of a legacy, general or specific, as a result of estate
being insufficient to pay all debts and legacies; (5) the act of
thrusting oneself tortiously into real estate after the owner
dies and before the legal heir enters. In P. Ramanatha
Aiyar’s Advanced Law Lexican , in the context of criminal
law, abatement of proceedings connotes their termination
without any decision on the merits and without the assent of
the prosecutor; and abatement of the main action abates
proceedings ancillary or collateral to it.
11. In the context of a civil proceeding, if, on death of any party,
either the right to sue, or to be sued, does not survive on the
Page 5 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
surviving parties, the proceeding would abate. In a criminal
action, trial is of the offender i.e., the person who is accused
of committing an offence. Therefore, if the accused facing trial
dies (or ceases to exist), the trial would abate and so would
the appeal against his acquittal, as the person to be
prosecuted or convicted, as the case may be, ceases to exist.
However, if the accused has been convicted and he files an
appeal against his conviction, on his death, the proviso to
sub-section (2) of Section 394 of Cr.P.C. enables a relative of
the convict to pursue the appeal with the leave of the court.
In absence thereof, the appeal abates. The purpose of such
liberty is, inter alia , to save the convict’s family’s honour.
There may be instances where the law requires that
proceeding shall be instituted and prosecuted by a particular
person and no one else. In such a case, if that person dies, in
absence of law permitting some other person to continue the
proceeding, the proceeding would abate.
12. Now, the issue which arises for our consideration is whether
on death of the revisionist, the revision proceeding under
Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. would abate.
The answer to it would depend on the nature of the order
Page 6 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
under challenge in the revision. If, for example, an accused
has invoked the revisional power for testing the correctness
of an order rejecting his discharge application, on his death,
the revision proceeding would abate because the main trial
would abate and, therefore, ancillary proceeding emanating
therefrom would automatically abate. But where the main
proceeding survives despite death of the revisionist, the
revision may not abate owing to the nature of the revisional
proceeding.
13. In Praban Kumar Mitra Vs. State of West Bengal &
8
Another , a Constitution Bench of this Court discussed the
nature of revisional powers of a High Court under Section 439
of the old Code (i.e., Code of Criminal Procedure 1898), which
9
is in pari materia Section 401 of the 1973 Code, read with
8
1958 SCC OnLine SC 79: AIR 1959 SC 144: 1959 Cri LJ 256: 1959 Supp (1) SCR 63
9
401. High Court's powers of revision.
(1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which
otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in its discretion, exercise any of the
powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Sections 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on a Court of
Session by Section 307 and, when the Judges composing the Court of revision are equally
divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by Section 392. (2)
No order under this section shall be made to the prejudice of the accused or other person
unless he has had an opportunity of being heard either personally or by pleader in his own
defence. (3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a
finding of acquittal into one of conviction. (4) Where under this Code an appeal lies and no
appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of
the party who could have appealed. (5) Where under this Code an appeal lies but an
application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court
is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies
thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat
the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly.
Page 7 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
Section 435 of the old Code, which is in pari materia Section
10
397 of the 1973 Code. In that regard, it was held that the
revisional power is a discretionary power which is to be
exercised in aid of justice. Whether the High Court should
exercise its revisional jurisdiction depends upon the facts and
circumstances of that case and once it entertains an
application for revision and issues a Rule, that Rule has to be
heard and determined in accordance with law, whether or not
the petitioner is alive or dead, or whether he is represented
in court by a legal practitioner. For ready reference, the
relevant portion of that judgment is extracted below:
“6. The revisional powers of the High Court
vested in it by Section 439 of the Code, read with
Section 435, do not create any right in the litigant,
but only conserve the power of the High Court to
see that justice is done in accordance with the
recognised rules of criminal jurisprudence, and
that subordinate Criminal Courts do not exceed
10
397. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision.
(1) The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any
proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction for
the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any
finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of
such inferior Court, and may, when calling for such record, direct that the execution of any
sentence or order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement, that he be released on
bail or on his own bond pending the examination of the record. Explanation. - All Magistrates,
whether Executive or Judicial, and whether exercising original or appellate jurisdiction, shall
be deemed to be inferior to the Sessions Judge for the purposes of this sub-section and of
Section 398. (2) The powers of revision conferred by sub-section (1) shall not be exercised in
relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding.
(3) If an application under this section has been made by any person either to the High Court
or to the Sessions Judge, no further application by the same person shall be entertained by
the other of them.
Page 8 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
their jurisdiction, or abuse their powers vested in
them by the Court. On the other hand, as already
indicated, a right of appeal is a statutory right
which has got to be recognized by the Courts, and
the right to appeal, where one exists, cannot be
denied in exercise of the discretionary power even
of the High Court. The legislature has, therefore,
11
specifically provided, by Section 431 of the Code,
the rules governing the right of substitution in
case of death of an appellant, but there is no
corresponding provision in Chapter XXXII, dealing
with the question of abatement and the right of
substitution in a criminal revision. We may
assume that the Legislature was aware of the
decision of the Bombay High Court, referred to
above, when it enacted Section 431 for the first
time in the Code of 1882. If the Legislature
intended that all application in revision pending
in a High Court, should be dealt with on the same
footing as a pending appeal, it would have enacted
accordingly. But in the absence of any such
enactment, we may infer that the power of revision
vested in the High Court under Chapter XXXII of
the Code, was left untouched -- to be exercised
according to the exigencies of each case. The High
Court is not bound to entertain an application in
revision, or having entertained one, to order
substitution in every case. It is not bound the
other way, namely, to treat a pending application
in revision as having abated by reason of the fact
that there was a composite sentence of
imprisonment and fine, as some of the single
Judge decisions placed before us, would seem to
indicate. The High Court has been left complete
11
Section 431 of Old Code : Every appeal under section 417 or section 417A shall finally abate on the death of
the accused, and every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence of fine) shall finally
abate on the death of the appellant.
Page 9 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
discretion to deal with a pending matter on the
death of the petitioner in accordance with the
requirements of justice. The petitioner in the High
Court may have been an accused person who has
been convicted and sentenced, or he may have
been a complainant who may have been directed
under s. 250 of the Code to pay compensation to
an accused person upon his discharge or
acquittal. Whether it was an accused person or it
was a complainant who has moved the High Court
in its revisional jurisdiction, if the High Court has
issued a Rule, that Rule has to be heard and
determined in accordance with law, whether or
not the petitioner in the High Court is alive or
dead, or whether he is represented in court by a
legal practitioner. In hearing and determining
cases under Section 439 of the Code, the High
Court discharges its statutory function of
supervising the administration of justice on the
criminal side. Hence, the considerations applying
to abatement of an appeal, may not apply to the
case of revisional applications…….”
(Emphasis supplied)
12
14. In Honnaiah T.H. Vs. State of Karnataka & Others on
the issue of locus to maintain a revision under Cr.P.C., it was
observed:
“16. The challenge to the maintainability of the
revision at the instance of the appellant
impugning an order passed during the pendency
of the trial must also be rejected. The revisional
jurisdiction of a High Court under Section
397 read with Section 401 of the CrPC, is a
12
(2022) SCC OnLine SC 1001
Page 10 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
discretionary jurisdiction that can be exercised by
the revisional court suo motu so as to examine the
correctness, legality or propriety of an order
recorded or passed by the trial court or the inferior
court. As the power of revision can be exercised by
the High Court even , there can be no bar
suo moto
on a third party invoking the revisional
jurisdiction and inviting the attention of the High
Court that an occasion to exercise the power has
arisen. Holding a revision petition instituted by a
complainant maintainable, Justice Santosh
Hegde writing for this Court in K Pandurangan v.
13
SSR Velusamy and another observed:
“6. So far as the first question as to the
maintainability of the revision at the instance of the
complainant is concerned, we think the said
argument has only to be noted to be rejected. Under
the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, the court has suo motu power of revision, if
that be so, the question of the same being invoked
at the instance of an out- sider would not make any
difference because ultimately it is the power of
revision which is already vested with the High Court
statutorily that is being exercised by the High Court.
Therefore, whether the same is done by itself or at
the instance of a third party will not affect such
power of the High Court. In this regard, we may note
the following judgment of this Court in the case of
Nadir Khan v. State (Delhi Admn).”
(Emphasis supplied)
15. The legal principles deducible from the afore-quoted extracts
may be summarised thus:
13
(2003) 8 SCC 625
Page 11 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
(a) revisional power under Cr.P.C. is a
discretionary power, the exercise of which cannot
be claimed as of right;
(b) exercise of revisional power is not entirely
dependent on who petitions the Court, inasmuch
as it can be exercised suo motu;
(c) the role of the revisionist is essentially that of
a person who invites attention of the Court that an
occasion to exercise the revisional power has
arisen;
(d) once a Rule is issued, ordinarily, that Rule has
to be heard and determined in accordance with
law, whether or not the petitioner is alive or dead,
or whether he is represented in court by a legal
practitioner; and
(e) the Court while exercising revisional power
discharges a statutory function of supervising the
administration of justice on the criminal side and
in furtherance thereof examines the correctness,
legality or propriety of an order passed by the court
subordinate to it.
Page 12 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
16. However, when a court is vested with discretionary power,
discretion must be exercised judiciously, based on sound
legal principles governing the scope of that power. Though
the strict rule of locus may not apply for invocation of that
power, the court must be circumspect in entertaining
petitions at the behest of complete strangers to the dispute,
otherwise the discretionary power may become a tool in the
hands of those who, though have suffered no injury, have
an axe to grind. Therefore, in our view, to ensure that
revisional power is not abused by those who have an axe to
grind, the definition of a victim, contained in Section 2(wa)
of the Code, may be used as a guide to determine whether a
revision should be entertained at the instance of the person
who has invoked the revisional power.
17. Since strict rule of locus does not apply to a revision
proceeding, on death of a revisionist, the law of abatement
that applies to an appeal does not apply to a revision
proceeding, more particularly when revision is not at the
instance of an accused. However, where the revision is at the
instance of an accused/convict, the revisional court may
refuse to continue the proceedings on his death, inter alia ,
Page 13 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
where (a) the revisional proceeding emanates from an order
passed during trial; or (b) the revisional proceeding is against
an order of conviction, or affirmance of conviction. In
situation (a) (supra), on death of accused the trial would
abate and so would ancillary proceedings emanating
therefrom. In situation (b) (supra), the sentence or fine
cannot be executed against a dead person, therefore, in
absence of any application from a person seeking leave to
pursue the revision, the court may terminate the
proceedings as having abated. However, where the revision
is at the instance of an informant or a complainant, on his
death, the proceedings will not abate and, therefore,
revisional court may exercise its discretion and proceed to
test the correctness, legality or propriety of an order passed
by the court subordinate to it.
18. In so far as substitution in place of the deceased revisionist
is concerned, there is no specific provision in the Code for
substitution. Therefore, no one can claim substitution as of
right. However, what is important is that there is no
provision for abatement as well, as is there for an appeal (see
Section 394). Hence, once a revision is entertained, in our
Page 14 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
view, the Court exercising revisional power has discretion to
proceed with the revision and test the correctness, legality or
propriety of the order under challenge before it, regardless of
the death of the person who had invoked the revisional
jurisdiction. However, while doing so, the Court may, in its
discretion, allow a person to assist it in discharge of its
statutory functions provided that person has no conflict of
interest. In that context, a victim of the crime would
ordinarily be the most suitable person to provide assistance
because of his interest in overturning a decision that went
against him. Therefore, when revisional powers are invoked
by a victim of the crime, and he dies during pendency of the
revision, other victims of that crime, who fall within the
scope of its definition, as provided in Section 2 (wa) of
Cr.P.C., may be allowed to assist the Court in effectively
discharging its statutory function. In that regard, the Court
would be well within its jurisdiction in granting leave to such
a person to pursue the revision. However, in absence of a
provision for substitution, though a person may not have a
legal right to claim substitution as a revisionist, there is no
legal restriction on revisional court’s power in allowing a
Page 15 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
person to assist the Court in furthering the cause of justice,
more particularly, when strict rule of locus does not apply to
a criminal revision.
19. In light of the discussion above, the impugned order of the
High Court dismissing the revision as having abated on
death of the revisionist is held unsustainable in law. More
so, because the trial against the accused-respondents is
pending.
20. As far as rejection of the application of the appellant to assist
the Court as a substitute for the deceased revisionist is
concerned, suffice it to say that the original revisionist (i.e.,
the informant) had alleged that the accused had set up a
fabricated sale deed to stake a false claim to his property.
Challenge in the revision was to an order of discharge of the
accused from offences other than cheating. Since on
revisionist’s death, his son (i.e., the appellant herein) would
inherit an interest in the property, in our view, the appellant
is a victim of the crime and, therefore, has vital interest in
the outcome of the proceeding. Hence, in our view, the
revisional court could have allowed him to assist the court
in the capacity of a victim of the crime.
Page 16 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
21. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the High Court
dismissing the revision as abated, and the order rejecting the
application of the appellant, are liable to be set aside and
are, hereby, set aside. The appeals are allowed. Revision No.
1986 of 2020 is restored on the file of the High Court. The
appellant shall be at liberty to assist the revisional court in
the capacity of a victim of the crime, and the revision shall
be decided expeditiously, in accordance with the law.
22. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the order under challenge in the revision
proceeding. The revision shall be decided on its own merit
without being influenced by any observation made herein
above.
23. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
…............................................. J.
(Sanjay Karol)
................................................ J.
(Manoj Misra)
New Delhi;
December 19, 2025
Page 17 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
2025 INSC 1484
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 5589-5590 OF 2025
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025)
Syed Shahnawaz Ali …Appellant (s)
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent (s)
J U D G M E N T
MANOJ MISRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These two appeals arise from a common proceeding and are
directed against the orders of the High Court of Madhya
1
Pradesh at Jabalpur dated 21.02.2024 and 31.08.2024
passed in Criminal Revision No. 1986 of 2020 and Misc.
Criminal Case (MCRC) No. 36327 of 2024 respectively.
Facts
3. The father of the appellant, Shamshad Ali, filed an
application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
CHETAN ARORA
Date: 2025.12.19
18:37:37 IST
Reason:
1
The High Court
Page 1 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
2 3
Procedure, 1973 for registering a first information report
against respondents 2 to 5. The said application was allowed,
an FIR was registered and investigated. After investigation,
police report was submitted indicting respondents 2 to 5 for
offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,
4
120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 . However, vide
order dated 07.03.2020, the Court of XVIIth Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhopal, M.P. discharged the accused
respondents from offences punishable under Sections 419,
467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 IPC and directed the trial to
proceed under Section 420 IPC only. Aggrieved by the order
dated 07.03.2020, the father of the appellant (i.e., the
informant) filed Criminal Revision No. 1986 of 2020 before
the High Court.
4. During pendency of the revision, on 05.05.2021 the father of
the appellant i.e., the revisionist died. The appellant, who was
arrayed as a witness in the police report, filed IA No. 19769
of 2021 to continue the revision proceedings. The High Court
by the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 rejected the
2
Cr.P.C.
3
FIR
4
IPC
Page 2 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
application holding that there is no provision for substitution
in a Criminal Revision and, therefore, the Revision would
abate.
5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant filed an
application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha
5
Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) for
recall of the order dated 21.02.2024. This application was
dismissed by the second impugned order dated 31.08.2024.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 21.02.2024 and
31.08.2024, the appellant is before this Court.
Submissions
6. In short, the submission on behalf of the appellant is that the
6
appellant is a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of
Cr.P.C. and is, therefore, entitled to continue the revision
proceedings. In the alternative, it is submitted that a revision
cannot abate. Once the Court entertains a revision, the Court
has to test the legality and propriety of the order impugned
before it. Therefore, the appropriate course for the High Court
5
BNSS
6
Section 2 (wa) of CrPC. – “victim” means a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the
act or omission for which the accused person has been charged and the expression “victim” includes his or her
guardian or legal heir.
Page 3 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
was to decide the matter on merits and for an effective
hearing to allow the appellant’s counsel or an amicus to
assist the Court.
7. On behalf of the State, written submissions have been filed
accepting the rights of a victim to participate in the criminal
justice process.
8. Per contra , on behalf of respondents 2 to 5, it has been
7
contended that Section 394 of Cr.P.C. applies to appeals.
There is no corresponding provision for continuance of a
revision by the legal heirs. No doubt, a victim may file an
appeal but, in absence of an enabling provision, he cannot be
substituted as a revisionist. In such circumstances, the
impugned orders call for no interference.
9. In addition to above, on behalf of respondents 2 to 5, it was
submitted that respondents 2 to 5 were discharged of certain
7
394. Abatement of appeals.
(1) Every appeal under Section 377 or Section 378 shall finally abate on the death of the
accused.
(2) Every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence of fine) shall
finally abate on the death of the appellant : 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.
Explanation. - In this section, "near relative" means a parent, spouse, lineal descendant,
brother or sister.
Page 4 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
offences for cogent reasons which do not suffer from any
perversity or illegality.
Discussion
10. Before we set out to test the correctness of the orders
impugned, it would be useful to first understand the concept
of abatement. In Black’s Law Dictionary abatement has
been described as: (1) the act of eliminating or nullifying; (2)
the suspension or defeat of a pending action for a reason
unrelated to the merits of the claim; (3) the act of lessening
or moderating; diminution in amount or degree; (4) the
reduction of a legacy, general or specific, as a result of estate
being insufficient to pay all debts and legacies; (5) the act of
thrusting oneself tortiously into real estate after the owner
dies and before the legal heir enters. In P. Ramanatha
Aiyar’s Advanced Law Lexican , in the context of criminal
law, abatement of proceedings connotes their termination
without any decision on the merits and without the assent of
the prosecutor; and abatement of the main action abates
proceedings ancillary or collateral to it.
11. In the context of a civil proceeding, if, on death of any party,
either the right to sue, or to be sued, does not survive on the
Page 5 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
surviving parties, the proceeding would abate. In a criminal
action, trial is of the offender i.e., the person who is accused
of committing an offence. Therefore, if the accused facing trial
dies (or ceases to exist), the trial would abate and so would
the appeal against his acquittal, as the person to be
prosecuted or convicted, as the case may be, ceases to exist.
However, if the accused has been convicted and he files an
appeal against his conviction, on his death, the proviso to
sub-section (2) of Section 394 of Cr.P.C. enables a relative of
the convict to pursue the appeal with the leave of the court.
In absence thereof, the appeal abates. The purpose of such
liberty is, inter alia , to save the convict’s family’s honour.
There may be instances where the law requires that
proceeding shall be instituted and prosecuted by a particular
person and no one else. In such a case, if that person dies, in
absence of law permitting some other person to continue the
proceeding, the proceeding would abate.
12. Now, the issue which arises for our consideration is whether
on death of the revisionist, the revision proceeding under
Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. would abate.
The answer to it would depend on the nature of the order
Page 6 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
under challenge in the revision. If, for example, an accused
has invoked the revisional power for testing the correctness
of an order rejecting his discharge application, on his death,
the revision proceeding would abate because the main trial
would abate and, therefore, ancillary proceeding emanating
therefrom would automatically abate. But where the main
proceeding survives despite death of the revisionist, the
revision may not abate owing to the nature of the revisional
proceeding.
13. In Praban Kumar Mitra Vs. State of West Bengal &
8
Another , a Constitution Bench of this Court discussed the
nature of revisional powers of a High Court under Section 439
of the old Code (i.e., Code of Criminal Procedure 1898), which
9
is in pari materia Section 401 of the 1973 Code, read with
8
1958 SCC OnLine SC 79: AIR 1959 SC 144: 1959 Cri LJ 256: 1959 Supp (1) SCR 63
9
401. High Court's powers of revision.
(1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which
otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in its discretion, exercise any of the
powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Sections 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on a Court of
Session by Section 307 and, when the Judges composing the Court of revision are equally
divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by Section 392. (2)
No order under this section shall be made to the prejudice of the accused or other person
unless he has had an opportunity of being heard either personally or by pleader in his own
defence. (3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a
finding of acquittal into one of conviction. (4) Where under this Code an appeal lies and no
appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of
the party who could have appealed. (5) Where under this Code an appeal lies but an
application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court
is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies
thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat
the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly.
Page 7 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
Section 435 of the old Code, which is in pari materia Section
10
397 of the 1973 Code. In that regard, it was held that the
revisional power is a discretionary power which is to be
exercised in aid of justice. Whether the High Court should
exercise its revisional jurisdiction depends upon the facts and
circumstances of that case and once it entertains an
application for revision and issues a Rule, that Rule has to be
heard and determined in accordance with law, whether or not
the petitioner is alive or dead, or whether he is represented
in court by a legal practitioner. For ready reference, the
relevant portion of that judgment is extracted below:
“6. The revisional powers of the High Court
vested in it by Section 439 of the Code, read with
Section 435, do not create any right in the litigant,
but only conserve the power of the High Court to
see that justice is done in accordance with the
recognised rules of criminal jurisprudence, and
that subordinate Criminal Courts do not exceed
10
397. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision.
(1) The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any
proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction for
the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any
finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of
such inferior Court, and may, when calling for such record, direct that the execution of any
sentence or order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement, that he be released on
bail or on his own bond pending the examination of the record. Explanation. - All Magistrates,
whether Executive or Judicial, and whether exercising original or appellate jurisdiction, shall
be deemed to be inferior to the Sessions Judge for the purposes of this sub-section and of
Section 398. (2) The powers of revision conferred by sub-section (1) shall not be exercised in
relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding.
(3) If an application under this section has been made by any person either to the High Court
or to the Sessions Judge, no further application by the same person shall be entertained by
the other of them.
Page 8 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
their jurisdiction, or abuse their powers vested in
them by the Court. On the other hand, as already
indicated, a right of appeal is a statutory right
which has got to be recognized by the Courts, and
the right to appeal, where one exists, cannot be
denied in exercise of the discretionary power even
of the High Court. The legislature has, therefore,
11
specifically provided, by Section 431 of the Code,
the rules governing the right of substitution in
case of death of an appellant, but there is no
corresponding provision in Chapter XXXII, dealing
with the question of abatement and the right of
substitution in a criminal revision. We may
assume that the Legislature was aware of the
decision of the Bombay High Court, referred to
above, when it enacted Section 431 for the first
time in the Code of 1882. If the Legislature
intended that all application in revision pending
in a High Court, should be dealt with on the same
footing as a pending appeal, it would have enacted
accordingly. But in the absence of any such
enactment, we may infer that the power of revision
vested in the High Court under Chapter XXXII of
the Code, was left untouched -- to be exercised
according to the exigencies of each case. The High
Court is not bound to entertain an application in
revision, or having entertained one, to order
substitution in every case. It is not bound the
other way, namely, to treat a pending application
in revision as having abated by reason of the fact
that there was a composite sentence of
imprisonment and fine, as some of the single
Judge decisions placed before us, would seem to
indicate. The High Court has been left complete
11
Section 431 of Old Code : Every appeal under section 417 or section 417A shall finally abate on the death of
the accused, and every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence of fine) shall finally
abate on the death of the appellant.
Page 9 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
discretion to deal with a pending matter on the
death of the petitioner in accordance with the
requirements of justice. The petitioner in the High
Court may have been an accused person who has
been convicted and sentenced, or he may have
been a complainant who may have been directed
under s. 250 of the Code to pay compensation to
an accused person upon his discharge or
acquittal. Whether it was an accused person or it
was a complainant who has moved the High Court
in its revisional jurisdiction, if the High Court has
issued a Rule, that Rule has to be heard and
determined in accordance with law, whether or
not the petitioner in the High Court is alive or
dead, or whether he is represented in court by a
legal practitioner. In hearing and determining
cases under Section 439 of the Code, the High
Court discharges its statutory function of
supervising the administration of justice on the
criminal side. Hence, the considerations applying
to abatement of an appeal, may not apply to the
case of revisional applications…….”
(Emphasis supplied)
12
14. In Honnaiah T.H. Vs. State of Karnataka & Others on
the issue of locus to maintain a revision under Cr.P.C., it was
observed:
“16. The challenge to the maintainability of the
revision at the instance of the appellant
impugning an order passed during the pendency
of the trial must also be rejected. The revisional
jurisdiction of a High Court under Section
397 read with Section 401 of the CrPC, is a
12
(2022) SCC OnLine SC 1001
Page 10 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
discretionary jurisdiction that can be exercised by
the revisional court suo motu so as to examine the
correctness, legality or propriety of an order
recorded or passed by the trial court or the inferior
court. As the power of revision can be exercised by
the High Court even , there can be no bar
suo moto
on a third party invoking the revisional
jurisdiction and inviting the attention of the High
Court that an occasion to exercise the power has
arisen. Holding a revision petition instituted by a
complainant maintainable, Justice Santosh
Hegde writing for this Court in K Pandurangan v.
13
SSR Velusamy and another observed:
“6. So far as the first question as to the
maintainability of the revision at the instance of the
complainant is concerned, we think the said
argument has only to be noted to be rejected. Under
the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, the court has suo motu power of revision, if
that be so, the question of the same being invoked
at the instance of an out- sider would not make any
difference because ultimately it is the power of
revision which is already vested with the High Court
statutorily that is being exercised by the High Court.
Therefore, whether the same is done by itself or at
the instance of a third party will not affect such
power of the High Court. In this regard, we may note
the following judgment of this Court in the case of
Nadir Khan v. State (Delhi Admn).”
(Emphasis supplied)
15. The legal principles deducible from the afore-quoted extracts
may be summarised thus:
13
(2003) 8 SCC 625
Page 11 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
(a) revisional power under Cr.P.C. is a
discretionary power, the exercise of which cannot
be claimed as of right;
(b) exercise of revisional power is not entirely
dependent on who petitions the Court, inasmuch
as it can be exercised suo motu;
(c) the role of the revisionist is essentially that of
a person who invites attention of the Court that an
occasion to exercise the revisional power has
arisen;
(d) once a Rule is issued, ordinarily, that Rule has
to be heard and determined in accordance with
law, whether or not the petitioner is alive or dead,
or whether he is represented in court by a legal
practitioner; and
(e) the Court while exercising revisional power
discharges a statutory function of supervising the
administration of justice on the criminal side and
in furtherance thereof examines the correctness,
legality or propriety of an order passed by the court
subordinate to it.
Page 12 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
16. However, when a court is vested with discretionary power,
discretion must be exercised judiciously, based on sound
legal principles governing the scope of that power. Though
the strict rule of locus may not apply for invocation of that
power, the court must be circumspect in entertaining
petitions at the behest of complete strangers to the dispute,
otherwise the discretionary power may become a tool in the
hands of those who, though have suffered no injury, have
an axe to grind. Therefore, in our view, to ensure that
revisional power is not abused by those who have an axe to
grind, the definition of a victim, contained in Section 2(wa)
of the Code, may be used as a guide to determine whether a
revision should be entertained at the instance of the person
who has invoked the revisional power.
17. Since strict rule of locus does not apply to a revision
proceeding, on death of a revisionist, the law of abatement
that applies to an appeal does not apply to a revision
proceeding, more particularly when revision is not at the
instance of an accused. However, where the revision is at the
instance of an accused/convict, the revisional court may
refuse to continue the proceedings on his death, inter alia ,
Page 13 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
where (a) the revisional proceeding emanates from an order
passed during trial; or (b) the revisional proceeding is against
an order of conviction, or affirmance of conviction. In
situation (a) (supra), on death of accused the trial would
abate and so would ancillary proceedings emanating
therefrom. In situation (b) (supra), the sentence or fine
cannot be executed against a dead person, therefore, in
absence of any application from a person seeking leave to
pursue the revision, the court may terminate the
proceedings as having abated. However, where the revision
is at the instance of an informant or a complainant, on his
death, the proceedings will not abate and, therefore,
revisional court may exercise its discretion and proceed to
test the correctness, legality or propriety of an order passed
by the court subordinate to it.
18. In so far as substitution in place of the deceased revisionist
is concerned, there is no specific provision in the Code for
substitution. Therefore, no one can claim substitution as of
right. However, what is important is that there is no
provision for abatement as well, as is there for an appeal (see
Section 394). Hence, once a revision is entertained, in our
Page 14 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
view, the Court exercising revisional power has discretion to
proceed with the revision and test the correctness, legality or
propriety of the order under challenge before it, regardless of
the death of the person who had invoked the revisional
jurisdiction. However, while doing so, the Court may, in its
discretion, allow a person to assist it in discharge of its
statutory functions provided that person has no conflict of
interest. In that context, a victim of the crime would
ordinarily be the most suitable person to provide assistance
because of his interest in overturning a decision that went
against him. Therefore, when revisional powers are invoked
by a victim of the crime, and he dies during pendency of the
revision, other victims of that crime, who fall within the
scope of its definition, as provided in Section 2 (wa) of
Cr.P.C., may be allowed to assist the Court in effectively
discharging its statutory function. In that regard, the Court
would be well within its jurisdiction in granting leave to such
a person to pursue the revision. However, in absence of a
provision for substitution, though a person may not have a
legal right to claim substitution as a revisionist, there is no
legal restriction on revisional court’s power in allowing a
Page 15 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
person to assist the Court in furthering the cause of justice,
more particularly, when strict rule of locus does not apply to
a criminal revision.
19. In light of the discussion above, the impugned order of the
High Court dismissing the revision as having abated on
death of the revisionist is held unsustainable in law. More
so, because the trial against the accused-respondents is
pending.
20. As far as rejection of the application of the appellant to assist
the Court as a substitute for the deceased revisionist is
concerned, suffice it to say that the original revisionist (i.e.,
the informant) had alleged that the accused had set up a
fabricated sale deed to stake a false claim to his property.
Challenge in the revision was to an order of discharge of the
accused from offences other than cheating. Since on
revisionist’s death, his son (i.e., the appellant herein) would
inherit an interest in the property, in our view, the appellant
is a victim of the crime and, therefore, has vital interest in
the outcome of the proceeding. Hence, in our view, the
revisional court could have allowed him to assist the court
in the capacity of a victim of the crime.
Page 16 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025
21. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the High Court
dismissing the revision as abated, and the order rejecting the
application of the appellant, are liable to be set aside and
are, hereby, set aside. The appeals are allowed. Revision No.
1986 of 2020 is restored on the file of the High Court. The
appellant shall be at liberty to assist the revisional court in
the capacity of a victim of the crime, and the revision shall
be decided expeditiously, in accordance with the law.
22. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the order under challenge in the revision
proceeding. The revision shall be decided on its own merit
without being influenced by any observation made herein
above.
23. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
…............................................. J.
(Sanjay Karol)
................................................ J.
(Manoj Misra)
New Delhi;
December 19, 2025
Page 17 of 17
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1715-1716/2025