IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL  NO. 1294   OF 2008

[Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 1923/2008]

MACHINDRA HARIBA MOHITE  ... APPELLANT(S)

:VERSUS:

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ... RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

Our attention has fairly been drawn to the fact that the criminal appeal filed

by the appellant herein was heard out by the High Court in absence of his counsel.

Although there cannot be any doubt, whatsoever, that the Court's valuable time is

wasted  in  such a matter but  as  the right  to  be represented by a lawyer is  also  a

valuable right, we are of the opinion that in a case of this nature, the High Court

would be well advised to appoint an amicus curiae and proceed to hear out the matter

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

Even on the date fixed for hearing if the amicus curiae does not appear, the

High Court would be at liberty to take up the hearing of the matter and proceed to

decide the same by obtaining the assistance of the counsel or the public prosecutor

present.

-2-

We deprecate such a practice on the part of the members of the Bar failing to

appear before the High Court, particularly when a case of this nature comes up for

hearing.

We, therefore, with great reluctance, set aside the impugned judgment and

remit the matter back to the High Court  for consideration of  the criminal  appeal

afresh.   The  High Court  shall  appoint  an  amicus  curiae  and  proceed to  hear  the

matter upon fixing a date of hearing.         

The appeal is disposed of with the aforementioned observation and direction.

..........................J (S.B. SINHA)

..........................J   (AFTAB ALAM)    NEW DELHI, AUGUST 13, 2008.