Criminal revision petitions under the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot proceed without necessary legal representatives of the deceased complainant.

CORAM: HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI C.A.V ORDER This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by accused under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C, challenging his conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act, which came to be confirmed by the Sessions Court in Crl.A.No.41/2015, by dismissing the appeal filed by him.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.

3. Vide order dated 09.09.2019, the sentence is suspended with a direction to the accused to execute personal bond and also deposit 50% of the fine amount, including the deposit if any, already made within a period of four weeks.

4. When notice was sent to respondent/complainant, it was returned with endorsement that respondent/complainant has died. His death certificate is also produced. Thereafter, several adjournments were granted to enable accused to bring the LRs of complainant on record and to proceed with the matter. However, accused has failed to file necessary application. In fact on 29.06.2021, this petition came to be dismissed for default for not taking steps.

5. However, accused filed I.A.No.1/2023 to recall the said order by condoning delay of 553 days in filing the recall application. It was allowed on 03.02.2023 and the petition was restored. The submission made on that day reveal that complainant has died even before Crl.A.No.41/2015 was filed and he was sued through his LR i.e., wife B.K.Janaki. However strangely accused filed this petition against complainant who was no more i.e., against a dead person. In the light of the said submission, accused was permitted to amend the cause title. Accordingly, the cause title of the present petition was amended inserting the name of wife of the complainant as his LR.

6. Unfortunately, when notice was sent to LR of the complainant, it was also returned with endorsement that the wife of complainant is also no more. Thereafter, the learned counsel for accused was directed to bring any other LR of complainant on record. Even though several adjournments were granted, no steps are taken to bring any other LRs of complainant on record.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for accused has filed I.A.No.1/2024 under Section 319 Cr.P.C, to direct the jurisdictional police to ascertain the LRs of complainant and I.A.No.2/2024 under Section 482 Cr.P.C to implead the State as respondent No.2 to enable the Court to decide the petition on merits.

8. In support of these applications, learned counsel for accused has relied upon the following decisions:

(i) Subbanna Hegde and Ors. Vs. Dyavappa Gowda (Subbanna Hegde)¹ (ii) Kushal Kumar Talukdar Vs. Chandra Prasad Goenka (Kushal Kumar Talukdar)

9. Heard arguments and perused the record.

10. Thus, in this petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C, accused has challenged his conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I Act. On the death of the complainant and his wife, instead of bringing any other LRs of complainant or his wife on record, accused has come up with I.A.No.1/2024 and I.A.No.2/2024.

11. As already noted I.A.No.1/2024 is filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. This Section deals with the power of the Court to proceed to any other persons appearing to be guilty of the offence which is being tried before the trial

1 Crl.P.No.204/1979 Dt: 03.03.1980

2005 Crl.L.J 599 Court. This provision has nothing to do with bringing the LRs of complainant on record.

12. So far as I.A.No.2/2024 is concerned, it is filed to implead the State as respondent to enable the