- (1.) The office has raised objection that learned counsel for the appellants has filed the power on behalf of appellant No. 5-John Tigga @ Johan Tigga only and has not filed the power on behalf of rest of the appellants.
(2.) It has been submitted that such objection has been raised by the office in view of the order of the Division Bench, passed in Cr. Appeal No. 272 of 2002 Binod Kumar Lal and Another v. State of Jharkhand, on 6th August, 2008, wherein the Division Bench has observed that the practice of filing/giving no objection to a counsel to appear on behalf of some of the appellants only is deprecated. Then this Court held 'no doubt, if a counsel wants to withdraw his appearance from a case, he can be allowed but he can't be allowed to retain power for one person and give no objection to any other counsel for another person'. In addition to above, a direction has been issued to the office, obviously to the Registry of the High Court, not to accept such Interlocutory Application or Vakalatnama in future. Learned counsel for appellant No. 5 submitted that order dated 6th August, 2008 is per-incurium, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.D. Sazena v. Balram Prasad Sharma, 2000 7 SCC 264, as by this order, right of litigant has been curtailed in choosing the advocate.
(3.) In this case, appellant No. 5 alone has decided to engage the present counsel and gave his power to appear in this appeal on behalf of appellant No. 5. The appellant No. 5 has also moved application for suspension of sentence through the present counsel and if, the appellant No. 5 will not be represented through the counsel of his choice, it will violate his fundamental right. It is also submitted that order dated 6th August, 2008 is not based on any legal provision, rather it runs to the contrary to the constitutional provision of accused's right to get defended through counsel of his choice as well as contrary to the provisions made in Section 303, Cr PC which recognizes the right of a person, against whom proceedings are instituted to be defended, which specifically provides that such accused shall have right to be defended by a Pleader of his choice.;