THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINALREVISION CASE No.435 OF 2025

ORDER

This Criminal revision is filed challenging the order 26.03.2025 in Crl.A.No.20 of 2025 on the file of the I Additional Family Court-cum- XIV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and consequently restore the Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2025 to its original file for hearing and disposal on merits in accordance with law.

2. I have heard Mr.Nikunj Dugar, learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The relevant facts, briefly stated, are that the court below dismissed the appeal for default on account of the appellant’s non- appearance on the date fixed for hearing. Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the present revision petition has been preferred seeking to set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that, owing to unavoidable and prevailing circumstances, neither the revision petitioner nor the counsel was able to appear before the court on the scheduled date of hearing. Counsel further contends that the petitioner has meritorious and substantial grounds in the appeal, and that the dismissal of the appeal, without affording her an opportunity of hearing, has caused grave prejudice to her legal rights and interests. She therefore prays that the impugned order be set aside, and that the petitioner be granted an opportunity to have the appeal heard and adjudicated on its merits.

5. I have perused the materials on record.

6. Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) unequivocally mandates that appellate courts must examine the record of the trial court and adjudicate criminal appeals on their merits, irrespective of the appellant’s personal appearance. Moreover, the CrPC does not contain any provision that authorizes the dismissal of a criminal appeal solely on the ground of non-prosecution. Accordingly, a criminal appeal should not be dismissed for default. In cases where the appellant or counsel fails to appear, it is incumbent upon the appellate court to consider and decide the appeal on its merits. If the appellant remains unrepresented, the court may, in the interest of justice, appoint an amicus curiae to assist in the adjudication of the matter.

7. This legal position has been consistently reaffirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of judgments, including: (1) Raghunath Sharma v. State of Haryana, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1148; (2) K.S. Panduranga v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 3 SCC 721; (3) Madan Lal Kapoor v. Rajiv Thapar, (2007) 7 SCC 623; and (4) Bani Singh v. State of U.P., (1996) 4 SCC 720 : 1996 SCC (Cri)

848.

8. In the recent decision, Raghunath Sharma (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as follows:

“7. A criminal appeal cannot be dismissed for the default of the appellants or their counsel. The court has either to adjourn the hearing of the appeal to enable them to appear, or should consider the appeal on merits and pass the final order.”

9. In view of the settled legal position and in the interest of justice, the impugned order dismissing the appeal for default is hereby set aside. Consequently, Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2023 is restored to its original file. The revision petitioner is directed to appear before the appellate court on 03.07.2025 to enable the court to proceed further. Upon such appearance, the appellate court shall consider and adjudicate the appeal on its merits in accordance with law.

10. With the above direction, this revision case is allowed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date:19.06.2025 ccm