SANT LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite repeated calls, none turns up on behalf of the appellant. Although, the appellant- Sant Lal- is the complainant in this case. Lower court record was directed to be summoned at the expense of the appelant on his request by this Court on 26.11.1084, but the office report dated 06.01.2018 reflects that lower court record has not been received till date.

(2.) Appeal is of the year 1987; 30 years have already elapsed and this appeal against order of dismissal/rejection of complaint has been pending ever since. It would be feasible and in the interest of justice that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping the matter pending in this Court even after elapse of three decades.

(3.) Faced with the aforesaid contingency and looking to the huge pendency of cases before this Court, this Court is not inclined to pass over this appeal. Under identical circumstances, the Apex Court, after a comprehensive analysis of previous decisions on the issue, has distilled the legal position into six propositions in paragraph 19 of its judgement delivered in the case of K.S. Panduranga v. State of Karnataka, 2013 3 SCC 721: