The court can proceed with a criminal appeal on merits in the absence of the appellant and does not need to appoint an Amicus Curiae if the record supports the conviction.

JUDGMENT :

1. List revised. No one appears on behalf of the appellant to press the present appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant died long back and as such, appellant was issued notice to engage another counsel vide order dated 24.10.2018. As per the report submitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah dated 11.01.2022, the appellant Luxman is missing since last 30 years. Noticing the aforesaid fact on 27.04.2024, following order was passed:

“The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah, by a letter dated 11.1.2022, has informed that the appellant Luxman is missing/absconding for the last 30 years.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah, with the help of administration may adopt all possible measures to search out the appellant. The measures which he would take would include the measure of tapping the sureties.

List this case on 27.5.2024. ”

3. According to the office report dated 24.05.2024, based on the report of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah dated 23.05.2024, whereabouts of the appellant and his family members are not known. Names and addresses of sureties could not be ascertained as the bail bonds furnished by appellant-accused were not found in the trial court’s record. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah vide letter dated 25.07.2024 has again reported that the appellant and the sureties could not be located.

4. In Surya Baksh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh , (2014) 14 SCC 222 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that it is always not necessary to adjourn the matter in case both appellants or his counsels/lawyers are absent and the Court can decide the appeal on merits after perusal of the record and the judgement of the trial Court. It has further been observed that if the case is decided on merits in the absence of the appellant, the higher court can remedy the situation. It has also been observed that appointment of Amicus Curiae is also on the discretion of the court. In paragraph 26 of the said judgement, it was held that it is always not essential for the High Court to an appoint Amicus Curiae, paragraphs 24 and 26 of the said judgement whereof are quoted as under:

“24. It seems to us that it is necessary for the Appellate Court which is confronted with the absence of the convict as well as his Counsel, to immediately proceed against the persons who stood surety at the time when the convict was granted bail, as this may lead to his discovery and production in Court. If even this exercise fails to locate and bring forth the convict, the Appellate Court is empowered to dismiss the appeal. We fully and respectfully concur with the recent elucidation of the law, profound yet perspicuous, in K.S. Panduranga v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 3 SCC 721. After a comprehensive analysis of previous decisions our learned Brother had distilled the legal position into six propositions:

“19.1. that the High Court cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution simpliciter without examining the merits;

19.2. that the Court is not bound to adjourn the matter if both the Appellant or his Counsel/lawye