Case Note & Summary
The revision petitioner, S.Jeyaeswari, was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Uthamapalayam under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonour of a cheque for Rs.5,00,000/- issued to the respondent, K.Kalaivani. The trial court sentenced her to six months simple imprisonment and directed payment of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. The revision petitioner appealed to the Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A.No.94 of 2022. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for default on 27.02.2024, noting that the appellant was absent and there was no representation on her side. Aggrieved, the revision petitioner filed the present criminal revision before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The revision petitioner's counsel argued that the appellate court erred in dismissing the appeal for default without considering the merits, and that the cheque was misused by the respondent. The respondent's counsel supported the appellate order. The High Court examined the legal position and held that under Section 372(3) Cr.P.C., an appeal against conviction lies to the Court to which the Court of Session is subordinate, and the appellate court is bound to decide the appeal on merits. The court noted that the appellate court cannot dismiss a criminal appeal for default; it must either hear the parties or their counsel, or if the appellant is absent, it may appoint a counsel at State expense or proceed ex parte, but must dispose of the appeal on merits. The High Court set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter to the appellate court for fresh disposal on merits, directing the appellate court to decide the appeal within three months. The revision case was allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal - Dismissal for Default - Section 372(3) Cr.P.C. - Appellate court dismissed appeal for default due to absence of appellant and counsel - Held that appellate court cannot dismiss a criminal appeal for default; it must decide the appeal on merits after hearing the parties or their counsel, and if the appellant is absent, the court may appoint a counsel at State expense or proceed ex parte but must dispose of the appeal on merits (Paras 7-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellate court can dismiss a criminal appeal for default under Section 372(3) of Cr.P.C. without considering the merits of the case.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision case, set aside the appellate judgment dated 27.02.2024 in Crl.A.No.94 of 2022, and remanded the matter to the Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni for fresh disposal on merits within three months.
Law Points
- Criminal appeal cannot be dismissed for default
- Appellate court must decide on merits
- Section 372(3) Cr.P.C. does not empower dismissal for default
- Right of appeal is substantive right
- Remand for fresh disposal
