Ms. S. v. Sunil Kumar & Anr.
Background
This was the appellant's (the victim's) criminal appeal against respondent No. 1, Sunil Kumar. By a judgment dated 10 April 2015, the Supreme Court had allowed the appeal, convicted Sunil Kumar under Section 376(1) IPC (rape), sentenced him to seven years' imprisonment with a fine payable to the appellant, while confirming his acquittal under Section 3(2)(v) of the relevant special Act, and directed him to be taken into custody. No one had appeared for respondent No. 1 at the hearing despite notice, so the Court had appointed an amicus curiae to represent him, and the appeal was heard and decided without anyone, including the State of Chhattisgarh or the appellant's counsel, informing the Court that respondent No. 1 had in fact died on 14 October 2012, well before the hearing.
Decision Breakdown
Once it was brought to the Court's attention (through counsel for the State) that respondent No. 1 had died before the appeal was even heard, the Court held that its own judgment of 10 April 2015 could not be given effect to, since a dead person cannot be convicted or sentenced. The Court therefore recalled its earlier judgment and order, and, recording that the appeal had abated on account of the respondent's death occurring before the appeal was heard, dismissed the criminal appeal as abated. The Court conclusively resolved the only question before it (what to do about a judgment rendered against a man who had already died), even though no decision on the underlying facts of the offence survives.
Lesson Learnt
A criminal appeal against an accused abates on the accused's death, and any judgment passed in ignorance of that fact must be recalled: parties and the State have a duty to promptly inform the Court of such a material fact rather than allowing proceedings to continue in its absence.