Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1294 OF 2008
[Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 1923/2008]
MACHINDRA HARIBA MOHITE ... APPELLANT(S)
:VERSUS:
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Our attention has fairly been drawn to the fact that the criminal appeal filed
by the appellant herein was heard out by the High Court in absence of his counsel.
Although there cannot be any doubt, whatsoever, that the Court's valuable time is
wasted in such a matter but as the right to be represented by a lawyer is also a
valuable right, we are of the opinion that in a case of this nature, the High Court
would be well advised to appoint an amicus curiae and proceed to hear out the matter
after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
Even on the date fixed for hearing if the amicus curiae does not appear, the
High Court would be at liberty to take up the hearing of the matter and proceed to
decide the same by obtaining the assistance of the counsel or the public prosecutor
present.
-2-
We deprecate such a practice on the part of the members of the Bar failing to
appear before the High Court, particularly when a case of this nature comes up for
hearing.
We, therefore, with great reluctance, set aside the impugned judgment and
remit the matter back to the High Court for consideration of the criminal appeal
afresh. The High Court shall appoint an amicus curiae and proceed to hear the
matter upon fixing a date of hearing.
The appeal is disposed of with the aforementioned observation and direction.
..........................J
(S.B. SINHA)
..........................J
(AFTAB ALAM)
NEW DELHI,
AUGUST 13, 2008.