Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

UDAI SINGH @ UDAI MAHTO @ DOCTORversusSTATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
ABATED

Holding

The appeal abated due to the appellant's death, the discretionary fine was set aside, and the imprisonment sentence was deemed abated.

Summary

Udai Singh, convicted under Section 302 of the IPC, appealed his sentence. While the appeal was pending, he died, as confirmed by police reports. No near relative applied for leave to continue the appeal under CrPC Section 394 (or its counterpart in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita). The Court noted that the fine imposed by the trial court is discretionary and, with the appellant deceased, set aside the fine. It further held that the imprisonment sentence abated due to the appellant's death, and consequently the appeal was disposed as fully abated.

Issues considered

  • The effect of the appellant's death on a pending criminal appeal
  • Whether a fine imposed on conviction can be set aside when the appellant dies
  • The procedural requirement for a near relative to seek leave to continue an appeal under CrPC Section 394

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • criminal appeal
  • death of appellant
  • abated appeal
  • Section 302 IPC
  • discretionary fine
  • CrPC Section 394
  • sentence abatement

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.1330 of 2008
                 ======================================================
                 Udai Singh @ Udai Mahto @ Doctor, son of Harihar Singh, resident of
                 Village- Nawgai, P.S.- Dariva, P.O.- Sikaria, District- Rohtas

                                                                                 ... ... Appellant

                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                            ... ... Respondent
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant     :         Mr. Neeraj Singh, Advocate
                 For the Respondent    :         Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                         and
                         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

                 (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

4   26-05-2026                 Perused     the     report      dated   11.05.2026      of    the

                   Superintendent of Police, Rohtas along with the report dated

                   02.05.2026 of the S.H.O., Darigaon Police Station, Rohtas,

                   which indicate that the sole appellant Udai Singh @ Udai Mahto

                   @ Doctor is dead.

                               2. In view of the said reports as also section 394 of the

                   Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which corresponds to

                   section 435 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,

                   since no near relative has filed any application for leave to

                   continue the appeal and having regard to the settled position of
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1330 of 2008(4) dt.26-05-2026
                                            2/3




          law as enunciated by the Hon'ble Division Bench of the High

          Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Santosh Kumar Baranwal

          v. State of UP, reported in 2010 SCC OnLine All 974, wherein

          it has been categorically held that upon conviction under

          Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the imposition of

          fine is discretionary in nature and does not partake the character

          of a mandatory requirement, and the legal position affirmed by

          the Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at

          Bombay in Gopala Balu Kamble v. State of Maharashtra,

          reported in 2011 SCC OnLine Bom 1290 being in consonance

          therewith, and whereas the appellant has since expired during

          the pendency of the present appeal and the conviction sought to

          be assailed pertains to the year 2008, and the State does not

          intend to pursue the recovery of the fine amount as imposed by

          the learned Trial Court, this Court, upon due consideration of

          the aforesaid facts, circumstances and settled legal position,

          hereby sets aside the order of imposition of fine passed by the

          learned Trial Court, and since the appeal insofar as it pertains to

          the sentence of imprisonment stands abated consequent upon the

          demise of the appellant, the present appeal is disposed of as

          having abated in its entirety.

                       3. Let the trial court record be sent back to the
           Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1330 of 2008(4) dt.26-05-2026
                                                       3/3




                     concerned court immediately, if not required in any other case.



                                          (Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)


                                                 (Harish Kumar, J)
shailendra/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.