Judgment S.N.Pathak, J. 1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 31.7.2000 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge V. Darbhanga in Cr. Appeal No. 46/89, confirming the judgment of the trial Court dated 29.7.89 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class. Darbhanga in GR Case No. 311/86. trial No. 583/89. 2. It has been submitted that the appellate Court recorded machnical judgment and confirmed the trial Courts order of conviction without taking into consideration the evidence on record in its right prospective. Moreover, the revisionists lawyer failed to appear on the date of the hearing of the appeal and hence appropriate assistance could not be given to the appellate Court to come to a just and proper decision. Hence, this revision may be remanded to the appellate court for a fresh decision. 3. I think the appeal may be reheard by the appellate Court for just and proper decision, in view of the fact that the appellants lawyer was not heard. 4. In the result, this revision is allowed and the judgment of the appellate Court is set aside. The matter is remanded to the lower Court for passing a fresh judgment in the light of the evidence on record after hearing the appellants lawyer if he appears and if no body appears, lawyer appointed by the court on behalf of the revisionist shall be heard and thereafter a fresh judgment shall be passed in accordance with law.