JUDGMENT

Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - The appellant, namely, Md. Gabbar has suffered judgment of conviction under section 376(g) of the Indian Penal Code in S.T. No. 326 of 1999. He has convicted and sentenced to R.I for ten years and fine of Rs.3,000/- under section 376(g) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. By an order dated 24.12.2004, the appellant has been granted bail. On 02.07.2019, when this matter was called out the following order has been passed by this Court:

"Mr. Navin Kumar Jaiswal, the learned counsel appears and states that initially this case was filed from the Chamber of Mr. B.M. Tripathy, the learned Senior Counsel, the then Advocate, however, presently they do not have further instructions in the matter.

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, the learned A.P.P appears for the State of Jharkhand.

Let notice indicating the next date of hearing be served through the officer-in-charge, P.S-Parsudih upon the appellant-Md. Gabbar, son of Late Usman, resident of village-Makadampur Parsudih, P.S-Parsudih, District-Singhbhum (East), Jamshedpur.

The Registry is directed to hand over copy of the notice for service upon the appellant to the learned A.P.P, for onward transmission.

Additionally, the Registry shall transmit a copy of the order to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur, for compliance.

The learned A.P.P shall obtain a report from the concerned Jail Superintendent on period of custody of the appellant.

The Registry is directed to serve a complete set of paper-book to the learned A.P.P, if already not supplied.

It appears that in Sessions Trial No.326 of 1999 two accused persons namely, Md. Gabbar and Md. Naushad were convicted for the offence punishable under section 376 (g) I.P.C.

The Registry shall verify whether accused-Md. Naushad has filed any criminal appeal or not.

If he has filed any criminal appeal, that shall be posted along with this criminal appeal on the next date of hearing.

Post the matter on 24.07.2019 under the heading "For Orders".

Let a copy of the order be given to the learned A.P.P."

3. Thereafter, this criminal appeal has been listed on 24.07.2019, 25.11.2019 and 18.12.2019.

4. By an order dated 25.11.2019, bail granted by this Court to the appellant was cancelled and the investigating officer was directed to take the appellant in custody. On 18.12.2019, Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo, the learned counsel was appointed as Amicus.

5. However, in the affidavit dated 06.01.2020, the Inspector of Police, Parsudih P.S has stated that steps were taken to apprehend the appellant, raids were conducted and enquiries were made from the neighbours but whereabouts of the appellant could not be found out. It is stated that the SIM card used by the appellant in his mobile phone was deactivated and he has sold the ancestral land. Finally, notices were published in the daily newspapers, such as, Telegraph, Dainik Bhaskar, Prabhat Khabar, Uditwani and Chamakta Aayina. Besides that, a team of four-member special team headed by Dy. S.P. (Law & Order) was constituted to arrest the appellant.

6. The appellant, who has availed of privilege of bail pending hearing of this criminal appeal, has absconded and, therefore, we are not inclined to hear this criminal appeal on merits.

7. In " Mahendra Bhogilal Tadvi Vs. State of Gujarat, (2009) 1 GLR 91 ", a Division Bench of the Hon''ble Gujarat High Court has dismissed the criminal appeal preferred by an absconder without hearing him on merits.

8. In " Surya Baksh Singh Vs. State of U.P., (2014) 14 SCC 222 ", the Hon''ble Supreme Court has observed as under:

16. "We cannot close our eyes to the reality that less than twenty per cent of prosecutions are successful; the rest are futile largely because of inept, shoddy or substandard investigation and prosecution. Even in cases where the prosecution succeeds in proving the guilt of the accused, punishment is emasculated by convicts not because of their succeeding in having their conviction overturned and reversed by the appellate court, but by go