Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Sampatraj Pirchand Jain on 17 August, 2023
Bench: J. C. Doshi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/2084/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2084 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SAMPATRAJ PIRCHAND JAIN
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ASMITA PATEL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Applicant(s) No.
1
MR RAJESH K KANANI(2157) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 17/08/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Asmita Patel for the petitioner
State and learned advocate Mr. Rajesh Kanani for the
respondent.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/2084/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2023
undefined
2. Learned APP places on record report of the concerned
investigating officer, which has recorded the statement of parties
to the dispute. Said report is taken on record.
3. The deed of compromise between the parties to the dispute
i.e. petitioner original complainant and the respondent accused
are placed through learned advocate Mr. Rajesh Kanani, which
is placed on record.
4. Both the parties i.e. complainant and the accused are
present before this Court and they have jointly submitted that
they have settled their quarrel amicably out of the Court and
now, they have no dispute regarding the allegations made.
5. The petition challenges order passed below Exh.1 in
Criminal Misc. Application No.4676 of 2015, whereby the
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.4, City Civil Court,
Ahmedabad City rejected the application filed by the State
seeking condonation of delay of 111 days caused in preferring
appeal against the order passed below Criminal Misc.
Application No.105 of 2015 discharging accused Mr. Sampatraj
Jain.
6. Having heard both the sides, this Court is of the
considered opinion that reason given by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge for not condoning the delay is not in consonance
with the underlying principle governing issue of condonation of
delay.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/2084/2016 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2023
undefined
7. It is trite law that while considering the application for
condonation of delay, the Court is required to adopt pragmatic
approach and allow the party to proceed further on the merits of
the case. In view of that the Court in ordinary consideration
would have allowed this petition and condone the delay and
permit the State to prefer appeal. However, during the passage
of time, since the parties have compromised their dispute
amicably out of the Court, now allowing the State to relegate to
the Sessions Court for pursuing the Criminal Misc. Application
for condonation of delay would be a futile exercise and may be
abortive process.
8. This Court has taken into consideration the deed of
compromise executed between the parties and the report placed
by the concerned investigating officer and since the parties have
amicably settled their dispute, now nothing is required to be
proceeded further. Thus, this is a fit case to close the
proceedings, as the parties have put their dispute to rest.
9. With this observation and direction, present petition
stands disposed of as not survived. Rule discharged. Interim
relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith.
10. It is made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case and it shall not be treated as
precedent in any other case.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
