Girdhari vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 6479 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 42
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE U/S 372 CR.P.C. No. - 325 of 2015
 

 
Appellant :- Girdhari
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Pankaj Sharma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Re: Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.168814 of 2014.

List revised. No one is present to press this delay condonation application.

On 21.04.2022 following order was passed:-

"Matter taken up.

None present for the appellant.

Despite sufficient service of notice upon accused respondent no. 2, neither he is present nor represented by any counsel.

Delay condonation application is still pending.

In the circumstances, an opportunity is being given to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

List this matter in the week commencing 11.07.2022.

It is made clear that if learned counsel appearing for the appellant will not appear on the next date fixed in the matter, the Court will proceed to decide the issue involved in the matter at this stage with the help of learned AGA."

Today again no one is present to press this delay condonation application.

Delay in filing the appeal has been sought to be explained by the appellant in paragraph no.2 of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application, which is quoted as under:-

"2. That there is no deliberate and wilful delay in filing the present Criminal Appeal, hence, the delay, if any, in filing the present criminal appeal may be condoned and the present Criminal Appeal shall be treated to be filed within time because the appellant rushed to this Hon'ble Court just after the judgment dated 12.06.2014 and he gave all the documents relating to the case to one counsel who was sitting at the place of present counsel. In the meantime he fallen ill and could not file this present Criminal Appeal within time and lastly he died without filing the Criminal appeal in month of January"

Cause shown as aforementioned is not sufficient.

As such, we do not find any good ground to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

Accordingly, delay condonation application stands rejected for want of prosecution as well as on merits.

Re: Appeal

Since in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Represented Through Legal Representatives Vs. State of Karnataka and others, 2019(2) SCC 752, leave to appeal application is not required and since the delay condonation application has been rejected, consequently, appeal also stands dismissed.

Order Date :- 11.7.2022

Nitendra