- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State.
(2.) THE instant Revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 22.6.2004, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTC., 7th, Giridih, whereby the conviction of the petitioner for the offences under Sections 325 and 323 of the I.P.C. and the corresponding sentences in respect of the said offences has been confirmed. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner while pointing out the certain paragraphs of the impugned Judgment of the learned lower appellate court submits that the petitioner had preferred the appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court but the lower appellate court had dismissed the appeal for purported non -prosecution and without hearing the petitioner at all and the appeal has not been disposed or by allowing adequate opportunity to the petitioner to be heard.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State concedes that from the perusal of the impugned judgment of the lower appellate court, it does appear that the appeal was dismissed for non -prosecution though the learned lower appellate court ilas also made certain observations on the basis of the facts of the case and the evidences on record.;