AYYUB Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. is directed against the order passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, in Criminal Revision No.1300064/2016 dated 17.10.2016 whereby, learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed criminal revision filed by the present applicants against the order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhar, in Criminal Case No.364/2016 dated 21.04.2016 whereby, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate framed charges against the present applicants under Sec. 406/34 of IPC.

(2.) The brief facts for disposal of this application are that when the impugned order dated 21.04.2016 was passed, the present applicants were not personally present before the Court and their presence was marked through their counsel. Charges were framed and their plea was recorded through the lawyer only. The lawyer did not inform them that the charges were framed, and subsequently, the present applicants came to know about the order only on 17.06.2016. After coming into the knowledge of the impugned order, they filed the revision against the order and also filed an application under Sec. 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay.

(3.) While dealing with the application filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, the learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that from the order-sheet of the trial Court, it was apparent that the advocate representing the present applicants was present, when the impugned order was passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The whole proceedings took place in presence of the advocate appointed by the present applicants. It was nowhere apparent that the advocate was not authorised to represent the applicants in their absence, and therefore, it could not be accepted that the present applicants had no knowledge of the order. When an advocate appeared to represent an accused, it is presumed that the accused himself had all the knowledge of the proceedings that took place when he was not physically present before the Court and when he was represented by the counsel.