Irshad vs State Of U.P.
2018 Latest Caselaw 1874 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 40
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1029 of 2011
 

 
Appellant :- Irshad
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Vishnu Kumar,Amit Saxena,M.P.S.Chauhan,Maohammd Nadeem
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Cause list has been revised.  No one appears on behalf of the appellant. 

The name of four counsel has been printed in the cause list.  The order-sheet indicates that the bail of the applicant was rejected in the year 2011 thereafter an adjournment was sought.  A parole application was filed which was dismissed for want of prosecution.  On 31.1.2017, 27.2.2017 and 7.10.2017 no one appeared for the appellant.  The case was directed to be listed again and again.  On 23.10.2017 when the parole application was dismissed for want of prosecution no one appeared on behalf of the appellant.  On 27.10.2017 an adjournment was sought.  It is therefore evident that repeatedly the court finds no assistance being rendered either by the counsel by non appearance or seeking adjournment.  Today again the same position exists.  It is therefore evident that none of the counsel are interested in pursuing this appeal either on account of their not having any instructions or otherwise.

Issue notice to the appellant informing him about this position or else this court will now proceed to appoint an amicus curiae and proceed to hear-out this appeal.

List after two weeks. 

The intimation be sent to the appellant through the Jail Superintendent concerned where the appellant is lodged in jail. The matter shall be listed along with the report of the Jail Superintendent.

Order Date :- 7.8.2018

Masarrat