FAROOQ M D Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This revision petition filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C is directed against the order dated 12-7-88 passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in Cr.A.No 124/87 dismissing the said appeal for non-appearance of the appellant and his learned counsel on the said date and also on the previous date of hearing.

(2.) The facts which have given rise to this revision petition are as under : Petitioner was accused in C.C.No. 5322 of 1984 on the file of the V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in which he was prosecuted for offences under Ss. 279 and 338 IPC. By judgment dated 30-9-87 the learned V Addl Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, convicted the petitioner-accused for offences under Section 279 and 338 IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- for the offence u/S 279 IPC and Rs.1000/- for the offence under Sec. 338 IPC, in all Rs. 1200/ with the usual default clause. Aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred Cr.A.No. 124/87 in the Court of the City Sessions Judge, Bangalore City. The said appeal by transfer came to the file of the Vll Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore City. After some adjournments, the appeal came up for hearing the arguments on merits on 11-7-88. On that day, neither the petitioner appellant nor his learned counsel appeared in Court although the appeal was called a number of times and kept by till 5 p.m. However, the learned Sessions Judge adjourned the appeal to the next day ie , 12-7-88 as a last chance. Even on 12-7-88, neither the petitioner appellant nor his learned counsel appeared in Court till 4-40 p.m. Therefore, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal with the following note made in the order sheet :

(3.) Heard Sri. N. Samba Murthy learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and Sri A Giddsppa, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor.