JUDGEMENT 1. This appeal a rises from a judgment of the Sessions Judge. Kokrajhar given on 22 June 1982 in Sessions Case No. 14(K) of 1981 convicting the appellants under S. 304, Part I read with S. 34 of the Penal Code and sentencing them to R.I. for 3 years each. 2. This appeal was called on for hearing on 13 Aug., 1987. Neither the appellants nor their counsel appeared when the appeal was called on for hearing. I was of the view that if the appeal was to be allowed, the appellants or their counsel might not be heard. Therefore, the matter was taken up for hearing in the presence of the learned Public Prosecutor, Assam. However, on 13 Aug., 1987 the hearing was not concluded. Therefore, the matter was again taken up on 14 Aug., 1987 for hearing. Neither the appellants nor the counsel for the appellants was present on 14 Aug., 1987 also. 3. In the cause list and Paper Book, the names of Mr. Md. Suleman and Mr. Ahmed Ali are shown as counsel for the appellants. As regards the absence of the appellants or their counsel in a criminal appeal against the order of conviction and sentence, the Supreme Court has, in Ram Naresh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 1500 : (1987 Cri LJ 1856), held : "We are fully conscious of this dimension of the matter but in criminal matters the convicts must be heard before their matters are decided on merits. The court can dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution and enforce discipline or refer the matter to the Bar Council with this end in view. But the matter can be disposed of on merits only after hearing the appellant or his counsel. The court might as well appoint a counsel at State cost to argue on behalf of the appellants." 4. In my opinion, having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court, the law and course of action, in the absence of the appellant or his counsel when a criminal appeal against the conviction and sentence is called on for hearing, may be summarised as follows. The appeal cannot be disposed of on merits without hearing the appellant or his counsel. The Court has the right to dismiss the appeal, or the Court may appoint a counsel at State expense to argue on behalf of the appellant. The appeal cannot be disposed of on merits without hearing the appellant or his counsel. The Court has the right to dismiss the appeal, or the Court may appoint a counsel at State expense to argue on behalf of the appellant. Discipline can be enforced against the counsel, or the Court may refer the matter to the Bar Council of the State. 5. For the reasons stated, in the present case, I exercise my right to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. The bail bonds are cancelled. The appellants are to surrender before the Magistrate of the 1st Class, Kokrajhar to serve out the sentence of imprisonment. However, liberty is granted to appellants to apply for restoration of appeal to file within a month from today, if need be so. 6. Before parting with the case, considering the problem of the working of the Court for the absence of the learned counsel when such a case was called on for hearing, the matter shall be referred to the Bar Council of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh for its necessary action. The Registry of this Court shall send a copy of this order to the President of the Bar Council. With the said observation and direction, the appeal is disposed of. Appeal dismissed.