Key legal question
Whether the appeal was admissible despite failure to provide the ordered security within the deadline.
Extracted holding
No. Because the appellant did not pay the required security within the time limit and did not seek an extension or reinstatement, the appeal could not be heard.
Extracted reasoning
Under Art. 383(1)-(2) CPP, the appellate authority may require security from the private complainant; if it is not provided in time, the appeal is inadmissible. Service of the notice was deemed effective after the seven-day custody period under Art. 85(4)(a) CPP.