Dineshchandra Solaji Jatiya vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 5865 Guj

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




     R/CR.MA/14122/2023                                ORDER DATED: 10/08/2023

                                                                                     undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 14122 of 2023
                  In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 27983 of 2023
==========================================================
                           DINESHCHANDRA SOLAJI JATIYA
                                      Versus
                                STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KALPESH M PANDIT(2713) 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 : 10/08/2023
                           ORAL ORDER

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

1. Rule. 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 23 days caused in filing the captioned criminal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 10.05.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge POCSO, Botad in Special (POCSO) Case No.5 of 2021.

3. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. As the applicant could not arrange money towards filing the appeal and approached the High Court Legal Services Authority for legal aid, and therefore, filed this appeal.

4. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the present application.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14122/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/08/2023

undefined

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 23 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