Judgment :- 1. The accused in two sessions cases, convicted under S.302 Indian Penal Code and undergoing imprisonment for life, are the appellants in these criminal appeals. These appeals filed by the accused were forwarded to this Court by the Superintendent, Central Prison, Trivandrum. The court has appointed counsel on State Brief to argue the appeals. But, when the cases were taken up for hearing, it has been brought to our notice that the Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Trivandrum has reported that the appellants are insane. The question is whether the appeals can be heard or the appeals are to be adjourned to be taken up for hearing after the accused appellants cease to be insane. 2. S.328 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 insists that the court trying a case in which the accused is a person of unsound mind and hence incapable of making his defence, should postpone further proceedings in the case. But no such specific provision is there in Chapter XXIX of the Code which governs appeals. Then the question is that simply because there is no provision can an appeal filed by an accused be heard and disposed of, if at the time of hearing he is insane, even if there is a counsel to argue his appeal. A counsel has to take instructions from his client. This is not possible when his client is insane. Not only questions of law but questions of fact also will have to be dealt with by the counsel in his arguments to substantiate the case of the appellant. The accused being insane, the counsel will be deprived of the opportunity of being instructed by them. The net result will be that the accused appellants will not get an effective opportunity of being heard if the court hears and disposes of the appeals when they continue to be insane. This is nothing but a denial of natural justice which cannot be done. So, the court has no other go but to postpone the appeals to be heard after the appellants cease to be insane. 3. In coming to the above conclusion we find support in certain authorities referred to at the time of hearing which we will presently refer to. In Sundaram v. State (AIR. 1960 Cal. So, the court has no other go but to postpone the appeals to be heard after the appellants cease to be insane. 3. In coming to the above conclusion we find support in certain authorities referred to at the time of hearing which we will presently refer to. In Sundaram v. State (AIR. 1960 Cal. 395) it has been held: "Where in a death reference and appeal it is found that by reason of unsoundness of mind, the accused is incapable of giving any instructions as to the appeal and the reference to his lawyer, the High Court has inherent power, ex debito justitiae, to postpone the hearing of the appeal and the reference until such time as the accused should be found to be of sound mind again and thus capable of making his defence." (para. 7) In Vivian Rodrick v. State of West Bengal (1970 S.C.C. (Crl) 33) the Supreme Court set aside a judgment of the Calcutta High Court where the appeal was heard and disposed of by the High Court when the appellant was insane and remanded the case to the High Court. Para.28 of the judgment reads: "Whatever may be the legal position regarding the applicability of S.465, Cr. P.C. to appeals, we are not inclined to agree with the proposition enunciated by the learned judges that there is no bar to 'hearing and disposing of an appeal, even if the accused-appellant is of unsound mind or even insane at the time when the appeal is taken up for hearing'. It must be remembered that in this case the appellate Bench had passed an order on January 11, 1965 that the Criminal Appeal No.5 of 1964 would be heard under S.411A(a), (b) and (c), Cr. P. C. That means that the appellant was entitled to challenge his conviction not only on any ground of appeal which involves, a matter of law only, but also to challenge his conviction on any ground which involves "a matter of fact. P. C. That means that the appellant was entitled to challenge his conviction not only on any ground of appeal which involves, a matter of law only, but also to challenge his conviction on any ground which involves "a matter of fact. Under those circumstances, it is clear that the appellant's appeal before the High Court involves also the determination of questions of fact and instructions which the appellant might give his lawyer as to the hearing of the appeal might well prove to be vital; but by reason of his unsoundness of mind and the consequent inability on his part to instruct his lawyer in the conduct of his appeal, it must be held that no effective opportunity in the matter of hearing the appeal had been provided to the appellant. When the medical report was that the mental condition of the appellant was worse and that he was of unsound mind and it was in the face of that report that the appeal was directed to be taken up for hearing, it is difficult to hold that a proper and, reasonable opportunity had been provided to the appellant with respect to his appeal, because it is impossible for the appellant to make himself heard either in person or through a lawyer when he is of unsound mind." In the judgment the Supreme Court also referred to Sundaram's case (AIR. 1960 Cal. 395). 4. In the result, we adjourn these appeals to be heard after the accused cease to be insane. Reports are to be called for from the Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Trivandrum every three months.