STATE OF H.P. Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the State assailing the judgment dtd. 29/4/2011, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, thereby acquitting the accused/respondent for the office punishable under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Leave to appeal was granted by the Court on 24/11/2011 and while admitting the appeal, bailable warrants against the respondent in the sum of Rs.20,000.00 with one surety in the like amount were issued. Despite various efforts made by the State, bailable warrants could not be served, therefore, the State filed an application being Cr.MP No. 1517 of 2018 for declaring the accused/respondent as proclaimed offender. The application was allowed on 25/10/2018 and the respondent was accordingly declared as proclaimed offender and thereafter proclamation as required under Sec. 82(2) of the Cr.P.C. also stood issued but the accused/respondent failed to put in appearance.

(3.) When the appeal came up for consideration before the Court, the question arise as to whether the appeal against acquittal could be heard on merit in absence of the respondent/accused, who had been declared as proclaimed offender by appointing legal aid counsel/amicus curiae or is required to be adjourned sine die till the actual service of the accused/respondent.