ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The appellants were tried and by judgment rendered by the trial court all of them were acquitted of the charges. On appeal being preferred, the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the appellants. Hence this appeal by special leave.

3. In the present case from the impugned judgment itself, it would appear that the accused were not represented by any counsel. It appears that they preferred an appeal through counsel but when the hearing of the appeal was taken up, nobody turned up on their behalf to press the appeal. The Court did not provide any counsel to the appellants by way of legal aid, but after hearing the counsel appearing on behalf of the State disposed of the appeal and reversed the order of acquittal. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that in the absence of the counsel, the High Court should have provided a counsel to the appellants by way of legal aid and same having not been done, the impugned order is fit to be set aside, especially, in view of the fact that the appellants have been found guilty in relation to an offence for which minimum sentence provided under law is t