Cr.A. No.541 of 2002 22.3.2010. Present: Mr.J.S. Guleria,Asstt.A.G., for the appellant. None for the respondent. A perusal of the record shows that the respondent has been declared as Proclaimed Offender. The question arises as to whether the appeal can be heard in his absence by appointing a state counsel at state expense. The question as to under what circumstances a state counsel can be appointed has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court, consisting of Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta and myself, in Criminal Appeal No.351 of 1992, decided on 6.1.2010. After referring to the case law, it was held in that case that no amicus curie can be appointed to represent an accused, in case he has never been served in these proceedings. The said decision is binding on this Court. A perusal of the record of the present case shows that the respondent was never served personally or any counsel put in appearance on his behalf at any time and proceedings were initiated under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. for declaring him Proclaimed Offender. Therefore, the net result of the above discussion is that neither any amicus curie nor state counsel can be appointed to represent the respondent. Therefore, the present proceedings are adjourned sine-die, as ordered on 13.10.2003. The appeal shall be revived as and when the respondent is apprehended by the prosecution and an application is moved in this regard. The present appeal is closed for the present. However, the record of the appeal shall not be destroyed. March 22, 2010. (V.K. Ahuja), (TRS) Judge.