JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathy, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr. P.D. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State.

3. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

“This revision has been filed against the judgment passed in Cr. Appeal No. 161 of 2008 dated 23.05.2012 by learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur”

4. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in G.R. Case No. 972/2002, Trial No. 425/2008 for the offence punishable under Section 304 A of the Indian Penal Code to undergo R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and further sentenced to fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset has submitted that the present application can be disposed of on the short point. He refers to the order dated 18.05.2012 passed by the appellate court wherein it has been recorded as under:

“Appellant take no step. In spite of repeated adjournment no one turned up on behalf of the appellant to argue the case. This case is running for hearing since 2008 and in spite of giving several opportunity no one turned up to argue the case. Argument on behalf of learned P.P has been heard. Put up on 23.5.2012 for judgment.”

6. Learned counsel submits that admittedly the appellant/petitioner was not heard by the appellate court and the case has been decided against the appellant/petitioner. Learned counsel has relied upon a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2011) 2 JLJR SC 102 (Md. Sukur Ali vs. State of Assam) and has referred to para 7 of the judgement to submit that even if the counsel for the petitioner did not appear before the court for final argument of the appeal, the court ought to have appointed an amicus for disposal of the case. He further submits that the appellate court is final court on facts and the assistance of a counsel representing the petitioner was required to be taken by the appellate court.

7. Learned counsel submits that considering the aforesaid judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the order dated 18.05.2012 passed by the learned appellate court , the present case may be remanded back to the appellate court i.e the court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur who had passed the impugned judgement with a direction to hear and dispose of the appeal afresh. Learned counsel submits the petitioner is ready and duty bound to appear before the learned appellate authority on any date as may be fixed by this court through his counsel so that the matter may be ultimately disposed of at the earliest. He also assures this court that the counsel who would appear before the appellate court would not seek any unnecessary adjournments and fully cooperate with the disposal of the appeal. The learned counsel has also submitted that the lower court records which has been received in this revision case may be sent back to the appellate court so that the appeal may be disposed of after considering the materials on record.

8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party3 State on the other hand is not in a position to dispute that the appellate court had decided the case in absence of the appellant/petitioner on account of non -appearance of his counsel on 18.05.2012 and the arguments of the State were concluded in his absence and the matter was posted for judgment. It is further not in dispute that no amicus as such has been appointed by the learned appellate court to assist the court on behalf of the appellant/petitioner for disposal of the case. Learned counsel for the State submits that the matter may be remanded back to the appellate authority for fresh hearing and disposal. He also submits that a date may be fixed for appearance of the petitioner such that the case can be disposed of at the earliest. T