The appellate court's failure to hear counsel or appoint Amicus Curiae in a criminal appeal under the NI Act is illegal and violates the right to a fair trial.

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the judgment dated 18.10.2019 in Criminal Appeal No.87/2016 passed by by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikara and also against the judgment dated 11.03.2016 in CC No.46/2014 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Chengannur.

2. The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Chengannur under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act') and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.84,500/- (Rupees Eighty four thousand five hundred only). In default of payment of the fine amount, the revision petitioner was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, an appeal is filed by the revision petitioner before the Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikara. When the appeal was posted for hearing, the counsel for the appellant was not present. Therefore the appellate court has taken the appeal as heard. The appellate court observed that the dictum laid down by the Apex Court regarding the appointment of Amicus Curiae is not applicable in a proceedings under of the NI Act. Hence the appeal is dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, this revision petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

4. Admittedly the revision petitioner filed a criminal appeal against the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner in a proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act. The trial court imposed substantive sentence also to the revision petitioner. There is no difference between a criminal appeal filed under the Indian Penal Code or other statute compared to the appeal filed under the NI Act. All criminal appeals are to be considered in accordance with law.

Admittedly the appeal is disposed without hearing the counsel for the appellant or without appointing an Amicus Curiae. I am of the considered opinion that such a procedure adopted by the appellate court is illegal. For that reason alone, the judgment of the appellate court can be set aside. I make it clear that I have not considered the matter on merit. The appellate court will reconsider the appeal in accordance with law, after hearing both sides.

Therefore, this revision petition is allowed with following directions:

1. The judgment dated 18.10.2019 in Criminal Appeal No.87/2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikara is set aside.

2. Criminal Appeal No.87/2016 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikara is restored.

3. The petitioner and the 2^nd respondent will appear before the appellate court on

14.07.2025.

4. The appellate court will proceed with the appeal and dispose the same, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of appearance of the parties.