Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Paresh @ Pintu Nanalal on 3 May, 2013
Author: Abhilasha Kumari
Bench: Abhilasha Kumari
STATE OF GUJARAT....Applicant(s)V/SPARESH @ PINTU NANALAL JHAVERI R/CR.MA/15220/2012 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 15220 of 2012 In CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 15219 of 2012 In CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1699 of 2012 ================================================================ STATE OF GUJARAT....Applicant(s) Versus PARESH @ PINTU NANALAL JHAVERI & 1....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR HIMANSHU K PATEL,ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Applicant No. 1 MR JA ADESHRA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI Date : 03/05/2013 ORAL ORDER
1. This application has been preferred by the applicant-State of Gujarat under Section-5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, with a prayer to condone the delay of 57 days that has occurred in filing the appeal against the judgment and order dated 10.05.2012 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.68/2009, whereby the respondents-original accused have been acquitted of the charges under Section 25(1-AA) of the Arms Act, 1959.
Heard Mr.Himanshu K. Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the applicant and Mr.J.A.Adeshara, learned advocate for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 has been served, but has not chosen to appear before this Court.
Mr.J.A.Adeshara, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has opposed the prayer for condonation of delay.
Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and upon perusal of the averments made in the application, especially paragraphs-3 and 4 thereof, it transpires that the applicant has shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The record does not reveal that there has been any carelessness or negligence on the part of the applicant in prosecuting the lis.
The prayers made in the application, therefore, deserve to be granted.
Accordingly, the application is allowed. The delay of 57 days that has occurred in filing the appeal against the judgment and order dated 10.05.2012 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.68/2009, is condoned. Rule is made absolute.
(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.) Gaurav+ Page 3 of 3