Having regard to the dictum of the three-Judge Bench in
Anokhi Lal (supra) and in order to curb the tendency of convicts to
raise technical pleas of the nature which were advanced before us,
we observe that, henceforth, whenever an appellate court considers
it desirable to appoint an amicus to represent a convict whose
counsel is absent, such court may also consider the desirability of
issuing a notice from the registry to the address of the convict
mentioned in the memorandum of appeal, for such notice to be
served on him through the jurisdictional police station, with an
intimation that the convict may contact the learned amicus and
provide him necessary instructions so that his case is argued before
the court effectively and meaningfully. In the event the convict
contacts the amicus and provides instructions, there would
ordinarily be no impediment in proceeding with hearing of the
appeal. If, indeed, the convict desires to have his own counsel argue
the appeal on his behalf and not the amicus, the court may hear
such counsel in addition to the amicus. However, if the service
report indicates that the convict was not found at the address or
that he refused to accept notice despite being present, it would
amount to sufficient compliance if the notice is pasted on the outer
wall of the premises, address whereof is mentioned in the cause title
of the memorandum of appeal. Should the convict still remain
dormant, and it is so reported, the High Court may proceed to
decide the appeal without waiting for the convict to turn up either in
person or through the counsel of his choice engaged by him. This
process, in our view, would substantially serve the purpose of
eliminating any plea of unfairness being raised before this Court if
an appeal is disposed of upon hearing the amicus appointed by the
court. Additionally, in a case of like nature where the appeal is listed two decades after grant of bail, this process would ensure obtaining of information as to whether the appeal survives for decision or stands abated.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
BHOLA MAHTO VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Citation: 2026 INSC 257 .
Read full judgment here: Click here.
