The death of a complainant in a criminal prosecution does not automatically terminate the proceeding. The court may substitute the legal representative of the deceased complainant as the complainant or prosecution agent.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment of Basak, J. discharging the Rule Nisi obtained by the appellant Sm. Mayabati Halder on her application under Article 226 of the Constitution.

( 2 ) RANJIT Kumar Nandy, the husband of the respondent No. 2 Sm. Aparna Nandy, was a tenant of two rooms of premises No. 51/b, Mohim Halder Street, Calcutta. On February 10, 1969, the said Ranjit Kumar Nandy filed a petition of complaint under Section 31 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 before the Rent Controller, Calcutta alleging inter alia that his landlady, the said Sm. Mayabati Halder had wilfully stopped the supply of tap water to the said premises by cutting and rendering unserviceable the water connection and had totally blocked and dosed the drain used for the purpose of outflow of garbage water from inside the said premises. The said application was registered as R. C. Case No. 71 of 1969. The appellant entered appearance in the proceeding started on the said petition of complaint and contested the tame by a petition of objection. As many at three witnesses were examined in the proceeding. Before the hearing was concluded, the complainant Ranjit Kumar Nandy died, on September 26, 1975.

( 3 ) ON January 28, 1976 an application was filed by the respondent No. 2 Sm. Aparna Nandy, his widow, praying for her substitution in the proceeding in place of her deceased husband. The said application was opposed by the appellant. It was contended by the appellant that on the death of the complainant, the petition of complaint should be dismissed in view of the provision of Section 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. The learned Rent Controller by his order dated May 24, 1977 overruled the said contention of the appellant and directed that the respondent No. 2 Aparna Nandy should be allowed to continue the proceeding started on the petition of complaint filed by her husband, the deceased Ranjit Kumar Nandy.

( 4 ) THE appellant, being aggrieved by the said order of the Rent Controller, moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution and obtained the Rule Nisi out of which this appeal arises. As stated already, Basak J. discharged the Rule Nisi. Hence this appeal.

( 5 ) SECTION 31 which is placed under Chapter VII -- Penalties and miscellaneous -- provides as follows:"31. Penalty for disturbances of easements, etc.-- Whoever, without the previous written consent of the Controller or, save for the purpose of effecting repairs or complying with any municipal requisition, wilfully disturbs any easement annexed to such premises, or removes, destroys or renders unserviceable, anything provided for permanent use therewith, or interferes with any supply or service comprised in the tenancy of such premises shall, on the complaint of the party aggrieved, be liable on the first occasion, to a fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, and on a second or subsequent occasion in regard to the same or any other premises, to a fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, to be imposed, after inquiry, by the Controller and the Controller may order immediate restoration of any supply or service which hat been interfered with. "rule 10 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Rules lays down the procedure to be followed by the Rent Controller in making enquiries under the Act. Rule 10 reads as follows:"10. In making enquiries under the Act, the Controller shall follow, as nearly as may be, the procedure laid down- (a) in the case of enquiries relating to offences, in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, for the trial of cases, and (b) in the case of all other enquiries, in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for the trial of suits, recording a memorandum of the substance only of the evidence and the reasons for his findings as in cases in which no appeal lies. "

( 6 ) IN view of Rule 10 (a), the Rent Controller has to follow, as nearly as may be, the procedure laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure for the trial of