Madhav Keshubhai Bhalsod vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 5741 Guj

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.MA/13782/2023                             ORDER DATED: 07/08/2023

                                                                                  undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 13782 of 2023

                    In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 26697 of 2023

==========================================================
                          MADHAV KESHUBHAI BHALSOD
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIJAL P DESAI(5505) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS ISHITA V DESAI(5975) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
       and
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                               Date : 07/08/2023

                           ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR)

1. Rule. Ms.Shruti Pathak, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent No.1.

2. This application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 6 days caused in filing the captioned criminal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 19.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No.63 of 2012.

3. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. The applicant belongs to very lower strata of the society and due to arrange the certified papers, he could not file the appeal in time and therefore, the said delay has occurred.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/13782/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2023

undefined

4. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the present application.

5. 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 justice. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. The Court is aware of that if delay condonation application is refused would mean to dismiss the appeal at threshold and there is no presumption the delay caused by the appellant 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.

6. In view of the above, the delay of 6 days is not being inordinate as explained in para 3, the application is considered. The application is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI