Ahmadi, C.J.I - (1.) -The short question that we are called upon to decide in this appeal is whether the High Court at Allahabad was justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the accused-appellants against the order of conviction and sentence issued by the trial Court, for non-prosecution.
(2.) The facts relevant for our consideration can be briefly stated. On 13-6-1979, the VII Addl. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, recorded an order convicting the appellants under Ss.366 and 368 of the IPC and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs.100/- each. The appellants filed an appeal against this order in the High Court of Allahabad. On 18-6-1979, the appeal was admitted by the High Court and notice was issued. The High Court also issued an interim stay on the execution of the sentence and the realization of fine while granting bail to the appellants. On 28-11-1990, the matter came up for hearing before the High Court. While dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution, the Court recorded the following order: "The List has been revised. No one present to argue the case on behalf of the appellant. Sri T.B. Islam A.C.A. is present on behalf of the State. In view of the law laid down in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 1987 SC 1500, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the case". The appellants preferred an appeal before this Court. On 19-1-1995, a Division Bench of this Court, while hearing the matter, examined the judgment in Ram Naresh Yadav v. State of Bihar (supra) and came to the conclusion that it was in conflict with the earlier ruling of this Court in Shyam Deo Pandey v. State of Bihar, AIR 1971 SC 1606. It, therefore, directed that the matter be heard by a larger Bench. Subsequently, the matter was posted before this Bench.
(3.) At this juncture, it would be pertinent to make a brief reference to the relevant provisions of law having a bearing on this case. Chapter XXIX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called 'Code') comprising Ss.372-394 deals with 'Appeals'. For the purpose of our examination, the relevant provisions are Ss.384-386. Section 384, which deals with summary dismissal of appeals, enables the Appellate Court to summarily dismiss an appeal "if upon examining the petition of appeal and copy of the judgment received", it "considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering". Section 385 provides that "if the Appellate Court does not dismiss the appeal summarily", it "shall cause notice of the time and place at which such appeal will be heard to be given" to the parties involved. It further provides that thereafter, the Appellate Court shall "send for the record of the case if such record is not already in Court" and "hear the parties". The relevant part of S.386 provides that "after perusing such record and hearing the appellants or his pleader, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor, if he appears", the Appellate Court "may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interference, dismiss the appeal". ;