• :Str»g?eBench IN THEJ-ION^BI..E^HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR CRIMINALREVISION N0. ^ei3l /2011 -j» 'lf 'l Jaipal ©Nepal S/o. Keshavo, aged about : 42 years, R/o. Village : Surajgarh,i Poiice Station : Pusaur, District; Raigarh (C.&.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : 1 '• - .. . : . Police Stdtion : Pusaur, District : Raigarh (C.G.). CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH SECTEON AQl OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURECODE , PETITIONER raN JAIU Pt<!sentedhyShn...A teted::::.:;....!.^^ RESPONDENT ^l. ir;. r^rfj Jaipal @ Nepal, S/o Keshavao, aged about 42 years, R/o Viltage: Surajgarh, Police Station : Pusaur, District: Raigarh (C.G.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station: Pasaur, District- Raiaarh (C.G.) Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel and Mr. Govi.nd I Advocates forthe applicant. Mr. R.R. S'nha, Panel Lawyer for the State. Heard. This revision is directed against the order dated 07.09.2011 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 47/2010 bythe Session Judge, Raigarh. 3y the impugned order, the appeai filed by the applicant against the conviction and sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court has been dismissed in default of payment of process fee for issuance of notice to The applicant was convicted under Section 294 & 323 IPC and ientenced to undergo S.l. for 1 month in two counts with a direction to run the sentences concurrently by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh in Criminal Case No. 110/2009 vide order dated 28.07.2010. The applicant filed an appeal against the said order before the Session Judge, which came to be registered as Criminal Appea! No. 47/2010. 11 appears that in the said appeal direction for payment of process fee was given by the Appellate Court but the applicant failed to r -<fs. m ® y %^y- • ^z CRWJNALREyiSIONNO. 531/2011 pay process fee, therefore, the Appeltate Court dismissed the appeal the applicant by passing the following order. "07/09/11 WTCTFaff BtrRa-ra" l vf^f ^ ^ •(irt'iqitf] (5TTO?T) ^ T1I]C<-1 ^ spteR-ff ^ STR ^ ^nRm^r ^r ^rfe^ ^nff "g^TR t^ 'siTff lcilciqMi 3RT ^ff f^TT ^Pn i sra- ^Tfe^- ^TTfT ^f ^r ^CT t i spfrcnsfi sriSro ^ ^ijlijl^il ^ gnf?T ^r TTT?K ^f f^ ^TT^ ^T •cf?^ g?Rur •^ff ^q^ f^TT]- 1 sft^a ^ 3)c|^*^j ^ •OT^- ?rar t fe spften&ff ^t ^rra- s ^f^raT ^ 'ePTHTR 'SwT STT^T ferr :3Tr?fT ^T t ) fe^ '33T^ 'cpafr 1-ft 13W?T ^TcT; ^Ttf f^TT 1 .'^H WOT7 ^? ^T?TiTcra ^T g^TT 'EF?! ^'y.ll'l ^raT 311 ^T t 1 3RT ^ WTt SfcR^ ^ff ^TT SIT <Tq5?n'1 sft^ T3^t W?RT ^ft ^T^ fi^wi q?T uTT^i' t I apftdTaff 7pt stsfFRsr ^wnw? ^ Piuwi^i^ ^o^R?r 'WR ?^ ^Rc- TR ^cT -quTT ^Tq- I Sfft^FTT? •^'uTOT ^t j A. (Rlcll'id W^) ^T^ '•t|]4!]S:-]l?l it is Sried iaw that Criminal appeal cannot be dismissed in default or none prosecufion wifhout going into the merits of the case. The Appellate Court must dispose of the appea! on merits after perusal and scrutiny of the record. In the present case, as stated above, the appeal of the applicant has been dismissed because the applicant did not comply the order relating with payment of process fee. We note that the respondent in the appeal is State of Chhattisgarh, which is usually represented bythe Public Prosecutor/Government Pleaderwho always remains available with the Court and service of notice on the Sfate in such matte.r ;s mere formality. The learned Session Judge without considering the above facts and circumstances, dismissed the appeal Kinminmwit *®'''^*1'" ^i: ^F'^::'"'""'<- '^ ^SsaSSRs!-. i'SIS8s58, JA 'w'<,'!?y ^ CRIMINAi. REVISION N0. 531/2011 in default of payment of process fee and the applicant has been sent to am of the view that the iearned Session Judge erred in law in taking such recourse for disposat of the Criminal Appeal filed against thejudgment ofconviction and sentence awarded to the appficant. Accordingly, the revision is allowed, the impugned orderdt. 07.09.2011 is set aside. The learned Session Judge is directed to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law. It is stated that after dismissal of the appeal, the applicant has been sent to jaii. Needless to say that after setting aside the impugned order, the learned Session Judge, keeping in mind that a short sentence has been awarded to the applicant, shal! make appropriate arrangement forthwith, so that the applicant be reieased from jai! immedi'afe!y and he remains free on the eariier bail bond tiif fhe final disposal of the appeal on merits. Certified coyybe given immediately. . ^_—- r~ Sd/- SunilKumarSinha Judge Rahul