Criminal Appeals Once Admitted Cannot Be Dismissed For Non-Representation/ Non-Prosecution: Kerala High Court

Justice A. Badharudeen observed:

“Thus the legal position emerges is that when an appeal is not summarily dismissed under Section 384 of Cr.P.C and the appellate court admits the appeal, the same cannot be dismissed for non-representation or non – prosecution without adverting to the merits of the appeal”

The Court said that the Appeal Court can deal with the absence of the accused and their counsel in any of the following ways:

I) The Court can adjourn the matter though the Court is not bound to do it.

ii) Dispose the appeal on merits after re-considering the records, evidence and judgment of the trial court. The Appeal Court should pass a reasoned order detailing the manner in which re-appreciation of evidence has been made. The Appeal Court should not be guided by the reasoning of the trial judge. It should cross- check the reasoning of the trial court with the evidence on record and make sure it is not contradictory, or

iii) Appoint a State Brief or Amicus Curiae to assist the court in disposing the appeal on merits.

The petitioner in the case was convicted under Section 307 of IPC by the trial Court for attempting to murder his wife while sleeping. The prosecution case is that the accused held his wife's neck and cut her throat while she was sleeping. The conviction was confirmed by the Appeal Court. The petitioner challenged the decision of the Appeal Court as the Court disposed of the appeal without hearing him.

The High Court noted that the petitioner failed to argue his case even though sufficient opportunities were provided by the court. The High Court held that the Appeal Court went through the evidence on record and re-appreciated the evidence.

The High Court held that the elements of an attempt to murder – intention to kill, an overt act to execute the intention were present in the case. Moreover, his wife and daughter gave evidence against the petitioner. There is also a wound certificate detailing the injury on the victim's neck and finger. Therefore, the Court did not find any need to interfere with the findings of the trial court and Appellate Court.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Advocates T. U. Sujith Kumar, Winston K. V.

Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor Adv. M. P. Prasanth

Case No: Crl. Rev. Pet. 679 of 2024

Case Title: Anil v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 613