Syed Shahnawaz Ali vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

2025 INSC 1484 REPORTABLE 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)

JUDGMENT

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

Pradesh at Jabalpur1 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 Procedure, 19732 for registering a first information report3

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,

120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 18604. 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

Sanhita, 20235 (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

appellant is a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa)6 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

contended that Section 3947 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 &

Another8, 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

is in pari materia Section 4019 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

39710 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, specifically provided, by Section 43111 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)

14. In Honnaiah T.H. Vs. State of Karnataka & Others12 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 suo moto, there can be no bar 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.

SSR Velusamy and another13 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