Once an appeal is admitted, the appellate court must consider the appeal on its merits, regardless of the appellant's desire to prosecute the same. However, if the offenses in question are compoundable under Section 345(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellate court, after admitting the appeal, is in the position of an original court holding the trial and is bound to record a composition if the parties agree to compound the offenses.

( 1 ) IN the final hearing of this appeal, a memorandum of agreement has been filed signed by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and for the respondents stating that at the intervention of common friends the parties have composed their disputes and settled the above appeal and that in view of the said settlement the appellant will not proceed with the appeal any further. A prayer has been made before me to give effect to the aforesaid settlement and to dispose of the appeal by allowing the appellant permission not to proceed any further with the appeal.

( 2 ) THE respondents were tried for having committed criminal trespass into the room of the appellant and for beating him. They were summoned to take their trial under Sections 448 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and after trial they were found not guilty of the charges on which they were tried and acquitted.

( 3 ) MR. Pankaj Kumar Ghosh in the petition for special leave has mentioned that the respondents were acquitted of the charge under Section 457 of the Indian Penal Code and in ground No. 1 of his petition of appeal has complained that the allegation made by his client amounted to an offence under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code, which offence was not triable summarily.

( 4 ) WHILE dealing with the joint prayer made by the parties in this court, I was of the view that both the offences as mentioned by Mr. Ghosh being non-compoundable, the Court had no jurisdiction to accord the permission asked for by the parties. On an examination of the records, however, it is discovered that Mr. Ghosh was wrong in saying that the respondents were acquitted of the charge under Section 457 of the Indian Penal Code and so far as the allegation that the offence was one under Section 452, Indian Penal Code, it was the submission of Mr. Ghosh and not the charge which the respondents were called upon to meet at the trial.

( 5 ) THERE can be no doubt that a criminal appeal once admitted has to the pursued to its natural conclusion and that the appellate Court must consider the appeal on its merits, whether or not the appellant is desirous of prosecuting the same. There are a large number of decisions of various High Courts on the point that once an appeal is admitted, it cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution nor can it be allowed to be withdrawn. The latest case on the point is the case of Sudhindra Nath Dutt v. The Stale, where Chakravarti, C. J. and Das Gupta, J. decided the point on an application on which they delivered the judgment on 16-4-1957. Their Lordships held "it appears to us that not only does the Code contain no provision from which any such jurisdiction of the Court can be inferred but on the other hand there are clear indications to the contrary. " they further held they had no jurisdiction to strike off the appeal on the ground that the appellant does not desire to proceed with it, The same view, namely, that once an appeal is admitted, the Appellate Court is to proceed in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 423 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been taken in the cases of Queen Empress v. Pohpi, ILR 13 All 171 (FB); Bansi Mirdha v. Brojeswar Dutt, ILR 50 Cal 972: (AIR 1924 Cal 95); Trimbak Balwant v. Emperor, ILR 50 Bom 673 : (AIR 1926 Bom 548 (1)), Emperor v. Ghulam Muhammad, AIR 1942 Lab 290 (FB); Ram Bharose v. Emperor, 17 Cri LJ 353 (1): (AIR 1916 All 43); Ram Chandar v. Emperor , 24 Cri LJ 662: (AIR 1923 All 175 (2)); Din Muhammad v. Emperor, 35 Cri LJ 963: (AIR 1934 Pesh 21 ).

( 6 ) THE above cases no doubt are in connection with the appeals from orders of conviction, but in my judgment that fact can hardly make any difference where appeals against orders of acquittal are to be dealt with. Chapter XXXI of the Code deals with the procedure relating to appeals and it makes no distinction regarding final disposal of appeals from conviction or appeals from the orders of acquittal, so far as the present question is c