Gujarat High Court
Shivam Mohansingh Rajput vs State Of Gujarat on 9 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/3800/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY)
NO. 3800 of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3842 of 2025
==========================================================
SHIVAM MOHANSINGH RAJPUT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SURAJ A SHUKLA(7185) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 09/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 135 days caused in filing the Criminal Appeal against the judgment and order dated 13.06.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.7885 of 2022.
[2.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the delay was caused purely due to circumstances beyond the control of the applicant and there was no malafide intention on the part of the applicant in filing the criminal appeal belatedly and therefore, has requested to condone the delay caused in filing the criminal appeal.
[3.0] Learned APP as well as learned advocate for respondent No.2 have vehemently opposed the present application.
[4.0] Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, the applicant has mentioned sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The primary function of the Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 10 00:05:13 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/3800/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/04/2025 undefined justice. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. The Court is aware of the fact that denial to condone the delay would mean to dismiss the appeal at threshold and there is no presumption that the delay caused by the applicant is deliberate. In view thereof, the words 'sufficient cause' under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. Even reason stated appears to be bonafide and genuine. There is no smack of malafide or dilatory tactics on the part of the applicant.
[5.0] In view of the above, the delay of 135 days as explained in the application is condoned. The application is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Main matter to be listed on 30.04.2025 subject to removal of office objections, if any.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 10 00:05:13 IST 2025