Gujarat High Court
Bhupendrasinh Kamalsinh Bhardwaj vs State Of Gujarat on 7 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3062/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 3062 of
2025
==========================================================
BHUPENDRASINH KAMALSINH BHARDWAJ
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KEVAL G BRAHMBHATT (BAROT)(9900) for the Applicant(s)
No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 07/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Keval Brahmbhatt for the petitioner and learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak for the respondent No.1 - State. Though served, none appears for respondent No.2 - original complainant.
2. Rule. Learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak waives service for respondent No.1 - State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Brahmbhatt submits that the respondent No.2 herein - original complainant has instituted one complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner. Thereafter, the trial commenced and ultimately at the end of the day, vide judgment and order dated Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:47:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/3062/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined 29.07.2024, learned Trial Court convicted the petitioner for the said offence. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction, the petitioner herein preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Court. However, as there was delay of 152 days in preferring the appeal, separate application for condonation of delay also came to be preferred by the petitioner. However, the said application is dismissed by the learned Appellate Court. Therefore, present petition is preferred.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submits that on account of dismissal of application seeking condonation of delay, valuable right of the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order of conviction is jeopardized. He further submits that petitioner was not aware about passing of the order of conviction by the learned Trial Court and the order of conviction is passed in his absence and therefore delay is occurred in preferring the appeal. Though the petitioner has explained sufficient cause for delay in preferring the appeal, the learned Appellate Court overlooked it and passed the order dismissing the application seeking condonation of delay. Hence, the impugned order may be quashed and set aside.
5. Learned APP Ms. Pathak has strongly objected present petition with vehemence and submits that learned Appellate Court has not committed any error Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:47:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/3062/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined while dismissing the application seeking condonation of delay. She, therefore, submits that present petition may be dismissed.
6. To prefer an appeal against the order of conviction is a statutory right of the convict and the said right cannot be jeopardized merely on the ground of delay in preferring the appeal. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.02.2025 passed by learned 11th Additional District Judge, Rajkot in Criminal Misc. Application No.312 of 2025 is hereby quashed and set aside and delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) LAVKUMAR J JANI Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:47:30 IST 2025