AMBIKA MANDALversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

                               [2008) 16 S.C.R. 763


                               AMBIKA MANDAL                             A
                                        II.
                  THE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)
                     (Criminal Appeal No. 1891 of 2008)
                             NOVEMBER 28, 2008
                                                                         B
               [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM
                              SHARMA, JJ.]

               Administration of Criminal Justice:
                                                                         c
                Disposal of appeal of accused without his being
           represented - Held: The accused had no· notice of transfer
           of his appeal· and when the matter was taken up by High
           Court, there was no representation - Judgment of High Court
           set aside and matter remitted to it for disposal afresh       0
           expeditiously - Practice and Procedure .

..J            The appellant-accused was convicted and sentenced
      1-   by the trial Court u/ss.304-C, 306 IPC and s.4 of Dowry
           Prohibition Act, 1961. The appeal was dismissed by the
           High Court. The accused filed the instant appeal primarily    E
           on the ground that the High Court dismissed his appeal
           without his being represented.

               Disposing of the appeal, the Court

                HELD: Originally, the appeal was pending before the      F
           Patna High Court and on reorganization of States, it was
           transferred to the Jharkhand High Court. The appellant
           had no notice and, therefore, when the matter was taken
           up, there was no representation. This position is not
           disputed by the respondent-State. In the circumstances,       G
           the impugned judgment is set aside and the matter is
           remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal
           expeditiou~ly. [Paras 4 and 5] [764-H; 765-A-B)

                                       763                               H
    764         SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2008] 16 S.C.R.


A       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal             -+.,.,..
    No. 1891 of 2008.

        From the final Judgment and Order dated 12',5.2003 of the
    High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Crl. Appeal No. 91 of
    1991.
B
          Gaurav Agrawal for the Appellant.

          Manish Kumar Saran for the Respondents.                     'f
          The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
c
          OR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.1. Leave granted.
                                                             .
       2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned
  Single Judge of the Jharkhand High Court dismissing the
D appeal filed by the appellant. The appeal was directed against
  the judgment of conviction and order of sentence pas$ed by
  the learned second Additional Sessions Judge, Santhal
                                                                                 Ii.
  Pargana, Dumka, convicting the appellant for offences
  punishable under Sections 304-8 and 306 of the Indian Penal           ~

  Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC') and also under Section 3/4 of
E
  the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (in short 'the DP Act'). The
  appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
  ten years for the first offence and seven years' for the second
  offence and six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence
  punishable under Section 4 of the DP Act.
F                                                                                      .,
       3. The factual background is not necessary to be dealt with.     )<_
  in detail as learned counsel for the appellant's primary stand
  was that the appeal was disposed of ex-parte and, he liad no
  notice of transfer of the case from Patna High Court to
G Jharkhand·High Court.

         4. Originally, the appeal was pending before the Patna
    High Court and on reorganization of States, it was transferred
                                                                        A.       '
    to the Jharkhand High Court. The appellant had no notice and,
    therefore, when the matter was taken up, there was no
H
                      AMBIKA MANDAL v. STATE OF BIHAR (NOW                765
                        JHARKHAND) [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

     - -t    representation. This position is not disputed by learned counsel    A
             for the respondent-State.

                 5. In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned
             judgment and remit the matter to the High Court for fresh
             disposal. To avoid unnecessary delay, let the parties appear        B
             before the High Court on 10.12.2008 witho.ut further notice. The
             Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court is requested to allot the
-I
      _,,.   case to an appropriate Bench.

                   6. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion ,
                                                                                 c
             on the merits of the case. It is fairly accepted by learned counsel '
             for the appellant that prayer for bail will not .be pressed, in case
             the appeal is taken up for early hearing. In that regard, we have
             already passed the above order. We request the High Court
             to explore the possibility of expeditious disposal of the appeal
             which is fifteen years old, preferably within four months from the D
             date of receipt of copy of our order.

 ~                  7. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
      '#-
             R.P.                                       Appeal disposed of.