@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Nevaskar, J.@mdashProceedings were started u/s 515, Criminal Procedure Code against petitioner No. 1 Dasharathla), Petitioner No. 2
Jhabbalal stood surety for him and executed a bond for securing the presence of Dasharath during the course of the proceedings in question. On
13th June 1955 Dasharath failed to attend the Court. He sent a telegram intimating his inability to remain present due to his having been attacked
by sun-stroke. The Court did not take notice of this telegram and directed issue of notice both to the accused and the surety to show cause why
the amount specified in their respective notices be not recovered as penalty. He heard them and directed recovery of the amount mentioned in the
notices from each of them. Both of them preferred appeal to the District Magistrate, Indore. This appeal was admitted, record was sent for and
notice was issued to the respondent. On one of the dates fixed for hearing viz. 7-5-1956, the appellants were absent. The appeal was thereupon
dismissed for default. This is a revision-petition directed against that order.
2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner by Mr. Bhojwani that the learned District Magistrate ought to have applied his mind to the facts of the
case and should have decided the appeal on merits Instead of dismissing the same for default. According to the learned Counsel this was an appeal
u/s 515 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and provisions of section 423 Criminal Procedure Code, which relate to the Criminal Appeals, ought
to be applied to the appeals u/s 515. There is no separate procedure provided for appeals u/s 518 and in the absence of any such separate
procedure, the provisions contained in sections 419, 422 to 423 should, in my opinion, apply. In AIR 1943 6 Peshawar 6, the provisions of
section 423 were applied in an appeal in respect of an order u/s 514 where the question was as to whether the appellate Court is empowered to
alter or reverse the order of the Court below or not. If then section 423 Cr.P.C. applies, it is clear that where the Court does not dismiss the
appeal u/s 421, it ought to peruse the record and may hear the appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and the public prosecutor, if he appears, and
then dispose it of according to law. In several cases it has been decided that where the appellate Court is called upon to exercise the powers u/s
423 Cr.P.C. it is not entitled to dismiss the appeal for default of the appellant. A full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, as held in 13 All 171 has
taken the view to this effect. Similar view has been taken in 50 Bom 673, AIR 1943 Mad 9. In view of this position in law, it is clear that the
dismissal of the appeal for default in this case, was not proper. The order of the lower Court is, therefore, set aside and the case is sent back to the
lower appellate Court for consideration of the appeal of the applicant on merits. An opportunity may be given to both the parties, appellants and
the respondent, to appear at the hearing of the appeal.