JUDGMENT : AIKMAN, J.:— The applicant, Bhawani Dehal, was convicted by a Magistrate of the first class of an offence punishable under section 457 of the Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to nine months' rigorous imprisonment. A petition of appeal was received in the Court of Sessions through the Superintendent of the Jail. This petition bears no date, but it was endorsed in it the following order by the officiating Sessions Judge:— “Appeal summarily dismissed.” 2. This order bears date the 2nd of April. In passing an order of this kind the Court below ignored what was said by this Court in the case of Q.E. v. Nannhu, (1895) I.L.R., 17 All, 241. Before this summary order had been passed, a legal practitioner, Muhammad Anwar Ali, had on the 24th March 1906, presented a petition of appeal on behalf of the convict. This petition was rejected by the Officiating Sessions Judge on the 7th of April, 1906, on the basis of his order of the 2nd of April. I set aside the Judge's order of the 2nd of April summarily dismissing the appeal and his order of the 7th of April rejecting the petition of appeal filed by Anwar Ali and direct him to dispose of the appeal after giving the legal practitioner an opportunity of arguing the case, which so far as the record shows he never had.