Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/772/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 772 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 771 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 149 of 2010
=========================================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
Versus
RANGITBHAI
@ RANJITBHAI SHANABHAI PATEL - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
LB DABHI, APP for Applicant(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s)
: 1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
Date
: 04/08/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA)
1. By
means of this application preferred by the Applicant State of
Gujarat, it is prayed to condone the delay of 84 days in prefering
Criminal Misc. Application No.771 of 2010 being Leave to prefer
Appeal bearing Criminal Appeal No.149 of 2010 against recording
acquittal of the respondent accused of the offence punishable under
Section 302 of Indian Penal Code by judgment and order dated 2.7.2009
rendered in Sessions Case No.98 of 2008 by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Panchmahal at Godhra.
2. Heard
Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned APP for the Applicant State. The
respondent, though served with the notice of Rule, yet he has chosen
not to remain present. Mr.Dabhi, learned APP submitted that the
delay occurred on account of inter-department and intra-department
procedure for obtaining required permission for the purpose of
preferring acquittal appeal. The reasons as to why the appeal could
not be preferred in time have been setforth in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5
in the memo of the application. The contents of these paragraphs
remained uncontroverted. The reasons setforth in the application are
supported by the affidavit of Mr.G.P.Rathod, Under Secretary, Legal
Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar.
3. Considering
the facts and circumstances of the case, so also explanation for
delay setforth in the application and celebrated principles regarding
condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and
pronouncement of the Honourable Apex Court construing the provisions
contained in Section 5 of the Limitation Act liberally, we are of the
considered opinion that the delay is required to be condoned.
4. For
the foregoing reasons, the application is allowed. The delay of 84
days in preferring Leave to Appeal being Criminal Misc. Application
No.771 of 2010 in preferring Criminal Appeal No.149 of 2010 is
condoned. Rule is made absolute.
(A.M.Kapadia,J)
(J.C.Upadhyaya,J)
pathan
Top