Madras High Court
S.Veeramani vs State Of Tamilnadu on 18 February, 2026
Author: Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
CRL.R.C.(MD)No.292 of 2026
and
Crl.M.P.(MD).No.3681 of 2026
S.Veeramani ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Tamilnadu,
Rep By Inspector Of Police,
Thevaram,
Police Station,
Theni District.
(Crime No.13/2018) ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442
of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in
S.C. No. 18 of 2019 dated 19.06.2024 on the file of the Assistant
Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni confirmed by the
Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A. No. 110 of 2024 dated
07.11.2024 and set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karunanithi
For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy
Government Advocate
1/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
ORDER
The present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed challenging
the judgment of Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A. No. 110
of 2024 dated 07.11.2024, whereby, the appeal was dismissed summarily
on the premise of non-prosecution. Relevant portion of judgment reads
as under:
“Appellant called absent. No representation by
Advocate, sufficient time already given. Hence this Appeal
is dismissed for non prosecution.”
2. The short question that arises for consideration in the present
revision is as to whether it is open to Appellate Court to dismiss the
appeal summarily on the premise that appellant is called absent and is not
represented by any counsel. The above question is no longer res integra
and stands resolved by a series of judgments of the Supreme Court and
other High Courts.
3. However, before I proceed to answer the above question, it may
be relevant to give a brief overview of the case. The defacto complainant
Gubendran/PW.1 is brother of the injured witness, Arivu @
2/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
Karuppanan/PW.2. Case of prosecution is that petitioner/accused
S.Veeramani and defacto complainant attended a funeral of Periyapandi
in their village. At that time, a wordy quarrel arose between
petitioner/accused and defacto complainant’s sister’s husband with regard
dispute over money. Immediately, Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 intervened
and abused petitioner/accused. During the last rites of Periyapandi, when
Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 was standing near burial ground, accused
arrived at the spot, abused Arivu @ Karuppanan/PW.2 and stabbed him
on the left side of his stomach and fled from the scene of occurrence. On
the basis of complaint given by P.W.1, FIR was registered in Crime No.
13 of 2018 for offences under Section 294(b) and 307 of IPC. On
completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in P.R.C.No.09 of
2018 and the case was committed and numbered in S.C.No.18 of 2019 on
the file of Assistant Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni.
4. Assistant Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni,
by order dated 19.06.2024 passed in S.C.No.18 of 2019, acquitted the
petitioner of offence under Section 294(b) of IPC and convicted for
offence under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo four
years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to
undergo one month simple imprisonment.
3/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
4.1. Aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal before Additional
District Judge (FTC), Theni in Crl.A.No.110 of 2024. However, appeal
came to be dismissed summarily by merely recording ”Appellant called
absent. No representation by Advocate, sufficient time already given.
Hence this Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution”.
4.2. It is against the above order of summary dismissal by
Appellate Court, the present revision has been filed on the premise that
once the Appellate Court has admitted the appeal, it ought to be decided
on merits and it is impermissible for the Appellate Court to dismiss the
appeal for non-prosecution or for non-appearance of appellant or his
counsel.
5. The above question, as stated supra, is no longer res integra and
stands resolved by the judgment of three Judges Bench of the Supreme
Court in Bani Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. reported in (1996) 4
SCC 720. The Supreme Court in Bani Singh‘s case while dealing with
the question as to whether it is permissible to dismiss an appeal for non-
prosecution, overruled the earlier decision in Ram Naresh Yadav Vs.
State of Bihar reported in AIR 1987 SC 1500. In Ram Naresh Yadav’s
4/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
case, it was found that the Court can dismiss the appeal for non-
prosecution and enforce disciplinary action against the erring Advocate
or refer the matter to Bar Council. In Bani Singh‘s case, it was held that
the decision in Ram Naresh Yadav‘s case was rendered without noticing
the earlier decision in Shyam Deo Pandey and others Vs. State of Bihar
reported in AIR 1971 SC 1606, wherein, it was held that once the
Appellate Court had admitted the appeal, it must be heard on merits and
Appellate Court cannot dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution or for
non-appearance of the appellant or his counsel. Relevant portion of the
judgment in Shyam Deo Pandey‘s case is extracted hereunder:
”19. A reading of Section 423 makes it clear that a criminal
appeal cannot be dismissed for default of appearance of the
appellants or their counsel. The Court has either to adjourn the
hearing of the appeal in order to enable them to appear or it
should consider the appeal on merits and pass final orders. The
consideration of the appeal on merits at the stage of final
hearing and to arrive at a decision on merits so as to pass final
orders will not be possible unless the reasoning and findings
recorded in the judgment under appeal are tested in the light of
the record of the case. After the records are before the Court
and the appeal is set down for hearing, it is essential that the
appellate court should: (a) peruse such record; (b) hear the
appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and (c) hear the public
prosecutor, if he appears. After complying with these
requirements, the appellate court has full power to pass any of
5/13https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
the orders mentioned in the section. It is to be noted that if the
appellant or his pleader is not present or if the public
prosecutor is not present it is not obligatory on the appellate
court to postpone the hearing of the appeal. If the appellant or
his counsel or the public prosecutor, or both, are not present,
the appellate court has jurisdiction to proceed with the
disposal of the appeal; but that disposal must be after the
appellate court has considered the appeal on merits.”(emphasis supplied)
6. Thus divergent views were expressed by the Supreme Court in
Ram Naresh Yadav and Shyam Deo Pandey. Divergence of opinion on
the above aspect was resolved by the Supreme Court in Bani Singh’s
case, wherein, the Supreme Court overruled the decision in Ram Naresh
Yadav‘s case and approved the law laid down in Shyam Deo Pandey’s
case. Relevant portion of the said decision is extracted hereunder:
”14. We have carefully considered the view expressed in
the said two decisions of this Court and, we may state that
the view taken in Shyam Deo case [(1971) 1 SCC 855 : 1971
SCC (Cri) 353 : AIR 1971 SC 1606] appears to be sound
except for a minor clarification which we consider necessary
to mention. The plain language of Section 385 makes it clear
that if the appellate court does not consider the appeal fit for
summary dismissal, it ‘must’ call for the record and Section
386 mandates that after the record is received, the appellate
6/13https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
court may dispose of the appeal after hearing the accused or
his counsel. Therefore, the plain language of Sections
385-386 does not contemplate dismissal of the appeal for
non-prosecution simpliciter. On the contrary, the Code
envisages disposal of the appeal on merits after perusal and
scrutiny of the record. The law clearly expects the appellate
court to dispose of the appeal on merits, not merely by
perusing the reasoning of the trial court in the judgment, but
by cross-checking the reasoning with the evidence on record
with a view to satisfying itself that the reasoning and
findings recorded by the trial court are consistent with the
material on record. The law, therefore, does not envisage the
dismissal of the appeal for default or non-prosecution but
only contemplates disposal on merits after perusal of the
record. Therefore, with respect, we find it difficult to agree
with the suggestion in Ram Naresh Yadav case [AIR 1987 SC
1500 : 1987 Cri LJ 1856] that if the appellant or his pleader
is not present, the proper course would be to dismiss an
appeal for non-prosecution.”
7. I also find support for the above position in the following
judgments of the Supreme Court:
a) K.Muruganandam and others Vs. State in Criminal Appeal No.
809 of 2021 dated 12.08.2021:
The Supreme Court found that if the accused does not appear
through counsel appointed by him/her, the Court is obliged to proceed
7/13https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
with the hearing of the case only after appointing an amicus curiae.
Relevant portion of judgment is extracted hereunder:
”8. It is well settled that if the accused does not
appear through counsel appointed by him/her, the Court is
obliged to proceed with the hearing of the case only after
appointing an amicus curiae, but cannot dismiss the appeal
merely because of non-representation or default of the
advocate for the accused (see Kabira vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh and Mohd. Sukur Ali vs. State of Assam).”
b) Shankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal
No.1106 of 2019 dated 23.07.2019:
It was reiterated that once appeal against conviction is admitted, it
is duty of Appellate Court either to appoint an Advocate as amicus curiae
or to nominate a counsel through Legal Services Authority and hear the
matter on merits and then dispose of the appeal. Relevant portion of
judgment is extracted hereunder:
”5. When the accused has preferred the appeal against
the conviction, the appeal can be disposed of on merits only
after hearing the appellant or his counsel. When there was no
representation for the appellant, in our considered view, the
High Court ought not to have disposed of the case on merits.
It was held in 2005 (11) SCC 185 titled Mangat Singh vs.
State of Punjab that where the advocate for the appellant is
absent on the date of hearing, the Court shall either appoint
an amicus curiae and then decide the appeal. Once the
appeal against the conviction is admitted, it is the duty of the
Appellate Court either to appoint an advocate as amicus
curiae or to nominate a counsel through Legal Services8/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
Authority and hear the matter on merits and then dispose of
the appeal. When the appellant was not represented by the
advocate, in our view, the High Court ought not to have
decided the matter on merits and the impugned order is liable
to be set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High
Court. The High Court shall restore the Criminal Appeal No.
296 of 2014 and afford sufficient opportunity to the appellant
and proceed with the matter in accordance with law. In case,
if the appellant is still not represented, we request the High
Court to nominate a counsel for the appellant through the
Legal Services Authority and proceed with the matter.”
8. From the above discussion, it leaves no room for any doubt that
it is impermissible for an Appellate Court to dismiss for non-prosecution
a criminal appeal filed against conviction on the premise that appellant is
called absent or is not represented by a counsel. In view thereof, this
Court has no hesitation in setting aside the judgment passed in the
appeal. Accordingly, the judgment passed by Additional District Judge
(FTC), Theni in Crl.A.No.110 of 2024 dated 07.11.2024 is set aside and
the matter stands remanded to the Additional District Judge (FTC),
Theni, who shall decide the appeal on merits. It is made clear that if for
any reason, the appellant is not represented by counsel, appellant may
request the Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni to nominate a counsel
through Legal Services Authority and thereafter, proceed with the matter.
9. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner
9/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
was on bail during pendency of appeal before the Additional District
Judge (FTC), Theni. However, he is presently confined in Central Prison,
Madurai and thus prayed for grant of bail. Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor would submit that it is necessary that petitioner co-operates in
proceedings before the Appellate Court, which was agreed to by learned
counsel for petitioner.
10. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that since
petitioner was on bail during pendency of appeal, he shall be enlarged on
bail subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the
satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayackanur;
ii) Petitioner and sureties shall affix their photographs and Left
Thumb Impression in the bond and the above said Court may obtain a
copy of their Aadhaar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
iii) Petitioner shall appear and sign before Judicial Magistrate,
Bodinayackanur, on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m.,
until the disposal of appeal;
10/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
iv) In case, petitioner is not able to appear before the said Court on
any day, he shall make arrangements to file an application under Section
317 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to 355 B.N.S.S) and shall appear before the
said Court on any other day in lieu of the date of his absence, as directed
by the said Court.
11. With the above observations, this Criminal Revision Case
stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
Index :Yes / No 18.02.2026
Internet :Yes / No
NCC :Yes / No
rgm
Note:
Registry is directed to mark a copy of this
order to Central Prison, Madurai through
mail forthwith.
11/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayackanur
2.The Assistant Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni
3. The Additional District Judge (FTC), Theni
4.The Inspector of Police,
Thevaram,
Police Station,
Theni District.
(Crime No.13/2018)
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
6. The Central Prison,
Madurai.
12/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
Crl.R.C(MD)No.292 of 2026
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
rgm
CRL.R.C.(MD)No.292 of 2026
and
Crl.M.P.(MD).No.3681 of 2026
18.02.2026
13/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 09:31:33 pm )
