ORDER :

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

The present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed challenging the judgment of Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A. No. 110 of 2024 dated 07.11.2024, whereby, the appeal was dismissed summarily on the premise of non-prosecution. Relevant portion of judgment reads as under:

“Appellant called absent. No representation by Advocate, sufficient time already given. Hence this Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.”

2. The short question that arises for consideration in the present revision is as to whether it is open to Appellate Court to dismiss the appeal summarily on the premise that appellant is called absent and is not represented by any counsel. The above question is no longer res integra and stands resolved by a series of judgments of the Supreme Court and other High Courts.

3. However, before I proceed to answer the above question, it may be relevant to give a brief overview of the case. The defacto complainant Gubendran/PW.1 is brother of the injured witness, Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2. Case of prosecution is that petitioner/accused S.Veeramani and defacto complainant attended a funeral of Periyapandi in their village. At that time, a wordy quarrel arose between petitioner/accused and defacto complainant's sister's husband with regard dispute over money. Immediately, Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 intervened and abused petitioner/accused. During the last rites of Periyapandi, when Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 was standing near burial ground, accused arrived at the spot, abused Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 and stabbed him on the left side of his stomach and fled from the scene of occurrence. On the basis of complaint given by P.W.1, FIR was registered in Crime No. 13 of 2018 for offences under Section 294(b) and 307 of IPC. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in P.R.C.No.09 of 2018 and the case was committed and numbered in S.C.No.18 of 2019 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni.

4. Assistant Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni, by order dated 19.06.2024 passed in S.C.No.18 of 2019, acquitted the petitioner of offence under Section 294(b) of IPC and convicted for offence under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo four years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment.

4.1. Aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal before Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A.No.110 of 2024. However, appeal came to be dismissed summarily by merely recording ''Appellant called absent. No representation by Advocate, sufficient time already given. Hence this Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution''.

4.2. It is against the above order of summary dismissal by Appellate Court, the present revision has been filed on the premise that once the Appellate Court has admitted the appeal, it ought to be decided on merits and it is impermissible for the Appellate Court to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution or for non-appearance of appellant or his counsel.

5. The above question, as stated supra, is no longer res integra and stands resolved by the judgment of three Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in Bani Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. reported in (1996) 4 SCC 720. The Supreme Court in Bani Singh's case while dealing with the question as to whether it is permissible to dismiss an appeal for non- prosecution, overruled the earlier decision in Ram Naresh Yadav Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1987 SC 1500. In Ram Naresh Yadav's case, it was found that the Court can dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution and enforce disciplinary action against the erring Advocate or refer the matter to Bar Council. In Bani Singh's case, it was held that the decision in Ram Naresh Yadav's case was rendered without noticing the earlier decision in Shyam Deo Pandey and others Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1971 SC 1606, wherein, it was held that once the Appellate Court had admitted the appeal, it