JUDGMENT M.F. Saldanha, J.—The State has made all possible efforts to trace the Respondent-accused. The obvious difficulty that has arisen is that in this case like in all other similar cases on the trial Court passing an order of acquittal, the accused who was in custody had to be released forthwith. Even if the accused are on bail and steps have been taken to secure their presence through a bail bond and sureties etc., all that comes to an end on the order of acquittal being passed and the Government and prosecuting authorities have absolutely no hold over the accused. Experience has shown that in a large number of cases, the acquittal orders are extremely vulnerable and the Government is well within its rights to file an appeal. That procedure however even if expedited to the maximum would take a little time because the copy of the judgment has to be procured as it is not immediately available and thereafter, it has to be considered and steps taken to move the higher Court. In the meanwhile, the accused invariably take necessary steps to ensure that they cannot be traced. 2. To quote an example as far as the present case is concerned, the accused was working as a coolie. He had no fixed place of residence or any property in the village. He had no relations or family members and once he was released, he has gone away from that place and despite efforts the Police report shows that they have not been able to trace his whereabouts and track him down. 3. This situation gives rise to one important aspect of the procedural law namely the fact that there is no provision, during the interim period, to ensure that the accused does not abscond. In serious prosecutions relating to drugs and smuggling offences, the accused in the first instance somehow manage to secure an order of acquittal and then disappear, totally frustrating the efforts of the Government to bring them to book. In our considered view, this lacuna requires to be plugged by making necessary provision for securing the presence of the accused during the interim stage. In our considered view, this lacuna requires to be plugged by making necessary provision for securing the presence of the accused during the interim stage. In the case of property that is the subject-matter of the trial, there are provisions which permit the Court to ensure that the property will not be returned or disposed of until the appeal period is over and it may be desirable to incorporate in the Code of Criminal Procedure some provisions whereby the presence of the accused can be secured for a reasonable period of time in case the State desires to carry the case further. 4. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor shall forward a copy of this order to the Law Secretary both at the State level and the Central Government for purposes of implementing the Court suggestions at the very earliest. 5. Having regard to the fact that the accused is virtually not traceable, we have no option except to dismiss this appeal. On the application of the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor however, liberty is given to the State if the accused is traced at any time to apply to this Court for revival of this appeal.