LAWS(RAJ)-2009-1-314

KALIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On January 28, 2009
KALIA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant misc. petition is filed by the accused petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with reference to judgment dated 31.8.1995 passed by this Court in S.B. Cri. Appeal No. 621/1980. Notice of this petition was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. Record of this case was perused.

(2.) During the course of arguments, it was submitted by the learned counsel that S.B. Cri. Regular Appeal No. 621/1980 against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 30.9.1980 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar in Sessions Case No. 11/1980 under Sections 307 and 324 I.P.C. sentencing him to imprisonment for 40 months and a fine of Rs. 50/- was pending for hearing in due course. For the first time, it was listed on 22.8.1995. On that day none appeared on behalf of accused appellant but the learned Judge on that day heard arguments of learned Public Prosecutor and reserved the judgment. On 31.8.1995 judgment was pronounced.

(3.) It was submitted that accused was on bail. He was not aware of the date of hearing and inadvertently counsel could not appear. It was urged that when the appeal was being heard on merit, accused should have been called and in his absence appeal should not have been decided. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that it is well settled position of law that criminal appeals are not decided ex parte. The Court of appeal can appoint amicus curiae for the accused applicant, if it is found that accused is not represented by counsel. It was urged that, in this way, the accused appellant has been deprived from his valuable right of hearing. Therefore, it was prayed that the impugned judgment passed in his absence, be set aside and the appeal be restored to its original number and the accused may be afforded proper opportunity to place his submissions. Learned counsel submitted that in compliance of the impugned judgment, at present the accused is behind the bars. In fact, without hearing him on merit, his appeal has been wrongly disposed of. A prayer was made to allow this petition to recall the said order and to take back on record the decided Appeal No. 621/1980 dated 31.8.1980.