3. None present for the appellant. In view thereof, the Court has
examined the material on record and gone through both the impugned
judgments with the help of Shri Kamal Mohan Gupta, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the State.
--------------
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2322 of 2010
Deepak Gulati …Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana …Respondent
-------------
As can be seen from the above judgment Supreme Court had decided the case of appellant even without the presence of counsel perusing the material on record placed before them. In this case the Counsel for respondent was present, but the Counsel for appellant was not present even then, the case was decided in favor of the appellant. However there are also decisions against litigants when counsel was not present in that the courts dismissed the petitions/appeals for the absence of counsel. It is not known which is correct approach. If the SC can decide the case perusing the material placed on record, why other courts do not follow suit? Or to decide against litigants dismissing their petitions/appeals for absence of counsel (even when material was filed by litigant to peruse in the form of Writ petitions, Appeals etc) itself is erroneous judgment? Kindly throw light on this.
Regards,
