Allahabad High Court
Alok Mishra vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 August, 2023
Bench: Ram Manohar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168765
Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1468 of 2023
Revisionist :- Alok Mishra
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Amrendra Pratap Singh,Amrendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mithilesh Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.
Instant criminal revision has been preferred against judgment and order dated 20.02.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No. 822 of 2022 (Alok Mishra Vs. M/s Vardan Automobile) by impugned order, appellate court has dismissed application for condonation of delay 5 K moved by the appellant-accused under Section 5 Limitation Act. The learned trial court convicted and sentenced the present revisionist for charge under Section 138 N.I.C Act in Complaint No. 3066 of 2014, P.S. Barra, Kanpur Nagar for two years simple imprisonment and Rs. 5,10,000/- fine with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist has surrendered before the court of first instance on 3.8.2023 pursuant to order dated 24.7.2023 of this Court and has filed a bail application also in present revision.
Learned counsel for both the parties are agreed that present revision may be decided finally at this stage.
After convicting and sentencing of the revisionist by order of court below, the appellant filed criminal appeal before the court of session, however, same was delayed by five days only and the appellate court while taking hyper technical approach rejected the application for condonation of delay moved by the revisionist under Section 5 of Limitation Act. He next submitted that there was no deliberate fault on the part of the revisionist in filing appeal after delay; whatever delay occurred in filing appeal was due to procrastinating approach adopted by his counsel, who could not prepare the appeal within period of limitation.
Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned AGA raised no objection to the contention made by learned counsel for the revisionist.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that approach adopted by the court below while rejecting the delay condonation application cannot be countenance and same is vitiated by taking hyper technical approach; delay was only few days and in view of dismissal of delay condonation application, appellant has been deprived by presenting his case before the appellate court on merit; the impugned order is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
The present revision is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
Grounds taken by the revisionist for condonation of delay before the appellate court are found sufficient. Delay occurred in filing of appeal is condoned. The matter is remitted back to the appellate court to admit criminal appeal on regular basis and hear and dispose of bail application and appeal of the appellant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 22.8.2023
Dhirendra/
