TRIBHUVAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. K. Mathur, J. Six accused including Tribhuwan were convicted for various offences including [one punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149, I. P. C. by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad, on 1-5-75. All the six accused preferred an appeal against their conviction and sentence in the High Court at Allahabad through Shri Keshav Sahai, Advocate. It, however, appears that the appeal was subsequently transferred to the Lucknow Bench for disposal.

(2.) THE judgment itself shows that at Lucknow no counsel appeared for the appellants and notices were, therefore, sent to all the appellants asking them to engage another lawyer for the hearing of the appeal. Notices sent to the accused-appellant Tribhuwan were returned with the report that he was not found at home and that his address was not known. THE Hon'ble Judge hearing this appeal, however, proceeded to hear it on behalf of appellant Tribhuwan also saying that his role was similar to that of all other appellants except for the offence under Section 147, of the Indian Penal Code and that they had carefully gone through the record with reference to his particular defence in addition to having the advantage o I hearing the arguments of the two Advocates who were appearing on behalf of the other accused. After hearing, the appeal was dismissed by this Court on 31-7-84.

(3.) THE right to be heard in a criminal appeal is a right statutorily re cognised by Section 385 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even other wise the courts have extended this right even to situations where any person's right is likely to be affected by a decision even taken by the administrative authorities.