Complaint by aggrieved person may continue after death where court authorises another complainant in a committal inquiry.

Section 198 CrPC bars cognizance unless a complaint is made by the person aggrieved or an authorised substitute, but once a valid complaint has been filed and cognizance taken, the provision is spent and does not require abatement on the complainant's death. Chapter XVIII contains no rule mandating acquittal or discharge in a committal inquiry because the original complainant is absent, and the court may permit another person to conduct the prosecution under Section 495 CrPC. The deceased complainant's mother was therefore properly allowed to continue the proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the death of the original complainant in a committal inquiry for offences requiring a complaint by a person aggrieved, the proceedings automatically abate or may be continued by another person permitted by the court.

Analysis: Section 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure creates a bar to cognizance unless the complaint is made by the person aggrieved, subject to the statutory exception permitting another person to complain in specified circumstances. Once a valid complaint has been filed and cognizance is taken, the section is spent; it does not itself provide that the proceedings must end if the complainant later dies. Chapter XVIII contains no rule requiring acquittal or discharge on the complainant's absence in a committal inquiry, unlike the specific provisions governing summons and warrant cases. The court's power under Section 495 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to authorise conduct of the prosecution by another person remains available, and the mother of the deceased complainant could properly be permitted to continue the prosecution.

Conclusion: The death of the original complainant did not cause the proceedings to abate, and the inquiry could validly continue through another authorised complainant. The decision was against the appellant.

---