JUDGMENT 1. - This petition arises out of the orders dated 9.9.1993 and dated 27.6.1995 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur camp at Deedwana in Criminal Appeal No. 16/91. The learned Appellate Court forfeited the bail bonds of the petitioner and initiated proceedings under section 446 Criminal Procedure Code and thereafter initiated proceedings under sections 82, 83 Criminal Procedure Code It is prayed by the petitioner that aforesaid orders may be quashed or in the alternative, the appellate Court may be directed to issue the bailable warrant for appearance of the petitioner in the Court to take part in the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that appeal was adjourned for several dates after initiating the proceedings under section 446 Criminal Procedure Code On 9.9.1993 on account of non-receipt of the record of the trial Court despite several reminders and D.O. Letters, the record of the trial Court was not sent to the appellate Court. Therefore, even if the petitioner would have remained present, no effective hearing could have taken place in the appeal. 3. In the above facts and circumstances, there appears to be just and reasonable cause for the absence of the petitioner in the appellate Court. It is further argued that petitioner is not absconding and he is student studying at Bombay, and therefore proceedings under sections 82 & 83 Criminal Procedure Code are unwarranted and in fact no reasonable steps were taken to serve the process issued by the Court. It was next argued that the petitioner remained absent under the bonafide belief that he would be intimated by his counsel, when the appeal will be taken up for hearing after receiving the record of the trial Court. The petitioner when came to know about the issuance of standing warrant dated 27.6.1995, this petition has been filed by him. 4. The petitioner had gone to Bombay to pursue his studies, and therefore, there was no deliberate attempt or any intention on the part of the petitioner to remain absent. The petitioner being student, no useful purpose will be served if he is allowed to be arrest. The petitioner is ready to appear in the appellate Court. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the proceedings under sections 82, 83 Criminal Procedure Code, and issuance of standing warrant by the appellate Court amounts to abuse of process of the Court. 5. The petitioner is ready to appear in the appellate Court. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the proceedings under sections 82, 83 Criminal Procedure Code, and issuance of standing warrant by the appellate Court amounts to abuse of process of the Court. 5. I have heard learned P.P. also and perused the certified copy of order Sheets. The appellant was absent on 9.9.1993 and therefore his bail bonds were forfeited and the learned appellate Court rightly ordered to issue warrant of arrest. It is true that record of the trial Court was not received on several dates but this by itself does not justify in any manner for the petitioner to remain absent from the Court. Warrant of arrest issued was not served, thereafter, the proceedings under sections 82 & 83 Criminal Procedure Code were initiated. 6. In the above circumstances, I am clearly of the view that this is not fit case where this Court would interfere with the proceedings drawn by the appellate Court or pass any order in exercise of inherent powers under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code I do not see in any manner, the case of any abuse of process of the Court. It is rather expected from the petitioner that he should appear before the appellate Court and make all the submissions, there which have been made by him in this Court. If such application is filed before the appellate Court the appellate Court shall consider and decide the submissions in accordance with law, but there is no ground to quash the impugned orders dated 9.9.93 and dated 27.6.1995. All the objections or contentions can be raised by the petitioner before the appellate Court in reply to notice to him of the proceedings under section 446 Criminal Procedure Code It is also necessary to issue direction to the petitioner to appear before the appellate Court on 10.1.1997 and the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner shall appear on the above date. 7. In the result, the petition is disposed of accordingly, with the direction to the petitioner to appear in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur camp at Deedwana on 10.1.1997 and the application if any filed on behalf of the petitioner will be disposed of by the learned appellate Court on the same day.Petition rejected with directions. *******