Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1258 OF 2013
(SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.)NO.2163 OF 2013)
SUNDER & ORS. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal
Appeal No.1104 of 1981, dated 19.11.2012.
3. The learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the
accused–appellants for the offences punishable under Sections
395/397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the accused
JUDGMENT
preferred an appeal before the High Court. Since the accused-
appellants could not engage the services of a lawyer, the High Court
had provided an amicus curaie to the accused-appellants to argue the
case on their behalf.
5. On the date when the matter was fixed for hearing, the
amicus curiae was not present before the High Court. The Court,
without appointing/providing a new amicus curiae, has proceeded to
pass the final orders on merits and thereby has partly confirmed the
orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge.
Page 1
: 2 :
6. In our considered view, at the time of the hearing the
appeal, if, for any reason, the amicus curiae was not present before
the Court, the Court either should have adjourned the matter or
should have appointed a new amicus curiae to assist the accused-
appellants. Since that has not been done by the High Court, in our
considered opinion, the orders of the High Court become vitiated. In
this view of the matter, we allow this appeal, set aside the orders
passed by the High Court and remand the matter back to the High
Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Needless to say
that it can either avail the assistance of the already appointed
amicus curiae or appoint a fresh amicus curiae to assist the
accused-appellants.
7. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case.
8. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGMENT
Ordered accordingly.
...........................J.
(H.L. DATTU)
...........................J.
(SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA)
NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 23, 2013
Page 2