FERASAT Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List has been revised. No one appears on behalf of appellant to press the present appeal. The appeal is of the year 1983.

(2.) As per office report dtd. 3/3/2022, the sole appellant, Firasat, is not traceable. NBW was issued against the appellant by the order dtd. 5/2/2024 of this Court. But the same could not be executed as the appellant no longer resides on available address. Sureties are also not traceable.

(3.) This appeal is being heard and disposed of in view of law propounded by Hon'ble Apex Court in Surya Baksh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 14 SCC 222, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that it is always not necessary to adjourn the matter in case both appellant or his counsels/lawyers are absent and the Court can decide the appeal on merits after perusal of the record and the judgement of the trial Court. It has further been observed that if the case is decided on merits in the absence of the appellant, the higher court can remedy the situation. It has also been observed that appointment of Amicus Curiae is also on the discretion of the court. In paragraph 26 of the said judgement, it was held that it is always not essential for the High Court to an appoint Amicus Curiae, paragraphs 24 and 26 of the said judgement whereof are quoted as under: