A LAKSHMAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 1973. The learned. Sessions Judge passed the following order dismissing the appeal. It reads as follows :-

(2.) Sri Rajasekhara Reddy, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioners now contends that the judgment prorounced by the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal for default is contrary to law. The learned Counsel further contends that the learned Sessions Judge has not considered the mandatory provisions of section 423 (1), Criminal Procedure Code (old). He further contends that the dismissal of the appeal for default is not coitemplatcd under section 423 (1), Criminal Procedure Code and even if the appellant's Counsel has not appeared at the time when the appeal was called on, he ought to have given a decision disposing of the appeal on merits. Hence he contends that the order passed by the lower appellate Court should be set aside and the appeal should be sent back for disposal on merits.

(3.) I find myself totally in agreement with the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioners.