Nani Gopal Das vs State of Tripura - 2014 Supreme(Tri) 343

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2014 Supreme(Tri) 343

S.C.DAS
Nani Gopal Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:B. Debnath, Advocate and S.S. Debnath, Legal Aid Counsel.
For the Respondents: A. Ghosh, P.P.

JUDGMENT

S.C. Das, J.

1. No representation on behalf of the petitioners. Learned P.P. is present for the State-respondent.

2. The revisional application was filed in the year 2006 and it is so long pending for hearing. On the last occasion i.e. 01.08.2014 also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners and so learned counsel Mr. S.S. Debnath who was present in the Court was engaged as a Legal Aid counsel to conduct the case on behalf of the petitioners but today even after repeated call neither the engaged counsel of the petitioners is present nor the learned Legal Aid Counsel is also present. So the engagement of learned Legal Aid Counsel, Mr. S.S. Debnath stands cancelled.

3. Since the revisional application is pending from the year 2006, I think it should be disposed of on merit even in the absence of learned counsel of the petitioners.

4. Heard learned P.P. for the State-respondent.

5. The revisional application is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.07.2006 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Belonia in Criminal Appeal No. 6(2) of 2006 where-under the learned Addl. Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 23.05.20