Court Sets Aside Dismissal, Directs Expeditious Hearing of Sanjay Yadav's Appeal After Advocate Non-representation
In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Abdul Shahid, has overturned the dismissal of Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 2022, reinstating it to its original position. The appeal, filed by Sanjay Yadav, was dismissed in default on October 26, 2023, due to the absence of his legal counsel. The Court highlighted that such dismissals are contrary to established legal principles and statutory provisions, specifically Section 425 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.), which corresponds to Section 384 of the Cr.P.C.
The judgment emphasizes the responsibility of the courts to appoint an amicus curiae in scenarios where the accused’s advocate is absent, rather than dismissing appeals summarily. This principle aligns with the Supreme Court’s precedent set in K. Muruganandam v. State Rep. by the Superintendent of Police, where it was reaffirmed that the accused's right to a fair hearing must be preserved.
Sanjay Yadav had initially appealed against his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as adjudicated by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Gorakhpur, on May 20, 2022. After his appeal was dismissed, Yadav filed a second appeal, coupled with an application for condonation of delay, which was also rejected on September 17, 2025, by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur.
The High Court’s decision to restore the original appeal underscores the legal system's commitment to ensuring justice by rectifying procedural missteps that could impede an appellant's rights. Justice Shahid’s order mandates the appellate court to expedite the hearing of the appeal, ensuring it is decided on its merits.
This judgment not only reinstates Sanjay Yadav's appeal but also reinforces the judiciary's role in safeguarding the procedural rights of individuals, particularly in criminal proceedings where the stakes are significantly high.
Bottom Line:
Criminal appeal cannot be dismissed in default merely due to non-representation or default of the advocate for the accused. The court is required to proceed with the hearing after appointing an amicus curiae if the accused is not represented.
Statutory provision(s): Section 425 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.), Section 5 of the Limitation Act
Sanjay Yadav v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2835476
