JUDGMENT

1. The challenge in this petition is to the orders dtd. 3/3/2022 and 24/3/2022, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nanded, in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2008.

2. Heard. The petitioner is one of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2008. It is an appeal against conviction. The petitioner and his parents have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A and related offences under the Indian Penal Code. The appeal has therefore been preferred by them.

3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the appellate Court has issued non bailable warrant (NBW) for securing presence of the petitioner herein. The judgment is ready for pronouncement for little over six months. The presence of the appellant is not necessary before the appellate Court. Insistence for his presence suggests what would be the result of the appeal. He, therefore, urged for grant of petition with a direction to the appellate Court to pronounce the judgment at once.

4. The learned APP supported the impugned order.

5. Considered the submissions advanced. This Court, initially, was not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, after having perused the releva