Safikul Islam vs Majeda Khatun
2023 Latest Caselaw 3991 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010092002023




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/393/2023

            SAFIKUL ISLAM
            S/O ANOWAR HUSSAIN,
            R/O GOLAPARA PART -3,
            P.S.- ABHAYAPURI, PIN- 783384, DIST.- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            MAJEDA KHATUN
            D/O SAMSUL HAQUE,
            VILL.- DHAKALIAPARA,
            P.S.- HOWLY, PIN- 781316,
            DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM.


Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. B K SEN

Advocate for the Respondent : S N ULLAH

             Linked Case :

            SAFIKUL ISLAM

             VERSUS

            MAJEDA KHATUN (A)

            ------------
            Advocate for : MR. B K SEN
            Advocate for : appearing for MAJEDA KHATUN (A)
                                                                                               Page No.# 2/2

                                      BEFORE
                         HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

                                                 ORDER

Date : 27-09-2023

Heard Mr. B. K. Sen, learned counsel for the applicant and also heard Mr. A. A. Dewan, learned counsel for respondents.

This application, u/s 5 of the Limitation Act is preferred by the applicant Safikul Islam for condonation of delay of 60 days in preferring the criminal revision petition against the judgment and order dated 11.8.2022, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta in F.C.(Crl) case No. 362/2021.

Mr. Sen, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the petitioner could not engage an Advocate in time to obtain the certified copy and in the process of some delay occurred and the said delay is not intentional rather, it is circumstantial and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition. Whereas,Mr. Dewan learned counsel for the respondents also submits that he has no objection, in the event of condoning the delay of 60 days in preferring the revision petition. Having heard the submission of learned Advocate of both sides, I have gone through the petition and the documents placed on record. It appears that the petition could not be filed in time, as the petitioner could not engage the counsel immediately after pronouncement of the judgment by the learned Court below and engagement of the engaged the counsel, the counsel took some time to obtain the certified copy and in the process, delay occurred. Thus, the delay appears to be explained sufficiently and it is not intentional rather it is circumstantial and therefore, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by condoning the delay of 60 days in filing the revision petition. In view of above, Registry shall register the Criminal Revision Petition and list the same before the Court.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant