1. This criminal appeal, by the State against acquittal, came up before us on reference because it was felt that the objection to the maintainability of the appeal, based on various decisions, including U. J. S. Chopra v. State of Bombay (AIR 1955 S.C. 633), requires deeper consideration.

2. The order of acquittal was challenged by the de facto complainant in Crl. R.P.No.515 of 1987 before this court. Accused and the State were the respondents. The revision application was admitted and notice given to the respondents. First respondent (accused) appeared through counsel and the second respondent, State, through Public Prosecutor. After hearing all concerned, the criminal revision petition was dismissed on merits on 20-11-87, though without a detailed consideration. Even at that time, this appeal filed by the State was pending. But none of the parties or the office of the High Court informed the court on the judicial side about it. That has resulted in prejudice and failure of justice also. This is not a solitary instance. This court on the judicial side had occasion to warn all concerned, including the office, about such lapses in many other cases. Proceedings against the