HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2492 of 1984 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. Case is called out in revised turn. 2. None is present on behalf of the appellant even in the revised call. Heard Shri Sharad Srivastava and Shri Subhash Singh Yadav, learned counsel appear for the respondents. 3. The present criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 28.09.1983 passed by Shri M.H. Khan, Special Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur in Criminal Case No.666/1983 (Abdul Rashid Vs. Gulam Rabbani), whereby the respondents had been acquitted under Section 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 of I.P.C. 4. The record reveals that the present appeal has remained pending before this Court for more than four decades. During the pendency of the appeal, the sole appellant, Rasid S/o Sri Khuda Buksha, expired. Consequently, notices were issued to his legal heirs to ascertain whether they were willing to prosecute the appeal further. 5. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of the legal heirs of the deceased appellant, nor has any application been moved indicating their intention or will to pursue the matter. It appears that the legal heirs of the deceased appellant, namely Rasid, are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. 6. It is a settled principle of law that in a complaint case, particularly where the appeal is directed against an order of acquittal, the matter cannot be proceeded with in the absence of the appellant or any person interested in Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : A.N.Srivastava, R.C.Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Awadesh Narain Srivastava, Sharad Srivastava, Subhash Singh Yadav Rashid .....Appellant(s) Rabbani And Others .....Respondent(s) prosecuting the same. The continuation of such an appeal, especially after an inordinate delay of more than forty years without any representation from the appellant's side, would serve no useful purpose. 7. In view of the above circumstances, and in the absence of any prosecution on behalf of the appellant, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the appeal. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. April 15, 2026 Pravesh Mishra CRLA No. 2492 of 1984 2 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad