Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: thackeray in Chetan Balutia vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 5 June, 2020Matching Fragments
12. An argument has been advanced that in the case of Ashwin (supra), principles have been laid down in the warrant trial, therefore, they would not be attracted in the instant case, because it is a summon case and death of the complainant will result in the acquittal of the petitioner.
13. This argument has no substance for the simple reason that Section 302 of the Code does not distinguish between summon case and warrant case. Moreover, under Section 256 of the Code, even on the death of the complainant, it is not necessary that the accused may be acquitted. The Court will still continue with the prosecution notwithstanding the death of the complainant. Similar arguments were advanced in the case of Balasaheb K. Thackeray and Another Vs. Venkat @ Bablu and Another, (2006) 5 SCC 530 (paragraph 3 of the judgment). But this argument was not accepted. What the Court held in the case of Balasaheb K. Thackeray (supra) was that "to bring an application of Section 302 of the Code, permission to conduct the prosecution has to be obtained from the Magistrate inquiring into or trying case." (Paragraph 6).