Abatement of appeals
Thursday, January 16, 2025 10:44 AM
The criminal justice process significantly impacts an individual's life, particularly their right to life and
liberty. To prevent miscarriages of justice, provisions for appealing lower court decisions are included in
the Sanhita (Sections 413-435).
Appeal is a complaint to a superior court of an injustice done or error committed by an inferior court,
whose judgement or decision the Court calls upon to correct or reverse. Appeal is statutory right, and
no one has an inherent right to appeal.
ABATEMENT OF APPEALS: SCHEME UNDER THE BNSS
Section 435 of BNSS (section 394 CrPC) provides that;
1. Appeals under Section 418 and 419 (i.e. appeals by State against inadequacy of sentence and
acquittal, respectively) will abate on death of accused/ convict; and
2. Every other appeal under Chapter XXXI of the BNSS will abate on the death of the accused/
appellant.
There are two exceptions to this, provided under Section 435(2) of the BNSS, viz.
An appeal from a sentence of fine will not abate on the death of the appellant; and
‘Near relatives’ (defined as parent, spouse, lineal descendant, brother or sister) are conferred with the
right to petition the court within 30 days of the death of the appellant in an appeal against a sentence
of death or imprisonment. If liberty is granted, the appeal will not abate.
CONTINUATION OF APPEAL ON DEATH OF APPELLANT
• Appeal for Sentence of Fine:
• Legal heirs can continue an appeal if the sentence only imposes a fine, as the fine impacts the
deceased's estate.
• If heirs choose not to contest, the fine can be recovered from the estate.
• Appeal for Composite Sentence (Imprisonment and Fine):
• On the death of the accused, the appeal abates for imprisonment but not for the fine.
• The Supreme Court has clarified that the appeal for the fine remains valid even when tied to
imprisonment.
• Appeal for Sentence of Imprisonment or Death:
• Such appeals usually abate on the death of the appellant as imprisonment affects the individual.
• Under Section 435(2) of the CrPC, “near relatives” can petition the court to continue the appeal
to clear the deceased's name and restore dignity.
• Judicial Precedents:
• In Sonelal Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court allowed the widow to continue
the appeal to challenge a corruption conviction, though the sentence remained intact.
• In cases like S.V. Kameswar Rao and Shankar Prasad Ghosh, the court denied continuation due
to significant unexplained delays in filing applications under Section 394(2).
• Conditions for Continuation by Relatives:
• Relatives must apply under Section 435(2) to seek permission to continue the appeal.
• A delay in applying may be condoned if reasonable, but unexplained or excessive delays may lead
to rejection.
Abatement of Criminal Revision Proceedings
• The abatement of criminal revisional proceedings on the death of the petitioner or accused lacks a
specific legislative provision analogous to Section 435 of BNSS, but courts have relied on its principles
BNSS or CrPC Page 1
specific legislative provision analogous to Section 435 of BNSS, but courts have relied on its principles
for guidance.
• Judicial precedents have established that in cases of revision petitions, the proceedings abate for the
sentence of imprisonment upon the death of the convict but not for the fine, as seen in P.R. Anjanappa
v. Yurej Agencies.
• Similarly, revision petitions against acquittals or discharge orders typically abate upon the death of the
accused/respondent, as held by the High Courts of Madras, Gujarat, Kerala, and Bombay.
• In cases where both petitioner and respondent pass away during the pendency of the revision, courts
have held the petitions to abate entirely. Thus, jurisprudence aligns the abatement of criminal revisions
with the principles of Section 394 CrPC, ensuring consistency in approach.
BNSS or CrPC Page 2
