A.M.KHANWILKAR, SANJIV KHANNA
K. MURUGANANDAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE – Respondent
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No.246/2012.
5. When the appeal came up for hearing on 08.07.2021, this Court passed the following order:
On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the High Court disposed of the criminal appeal for non prosecution because of non appearance of the counsel for the petitioners. In such a situation, the High Court is expected to nominate an Amicus Curiae; and after taking assistance of Amicus Curiae proceed with the hearing of the matter.
On this count alone, the impugned order of non prosecution is unsustainable.
Nevertheless, before we remand the criminal appeal back to the High Court for considering it afresh while taking note of the submission made by counsel for the respondents that the petitioners have intentionally avoided to appear when the appeal was called out for hearing on different dates, we direct the petitioners to first surrender and produce surrender certificate. Thereafter the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.