Gujarat High Court
Ramkishore Bharatsinh Yadav vs State Of Gujarat on 13 December, 2023
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14910/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF
DELAY) NO. 14910 of 2023
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 25842 of 2023
=============================================
RAMKISHORE BHARATSINH YADAV
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. AAMIR S PATHAN(7142) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. DIVYANG A RAMANI(7180) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 13/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Rule. Learned APP, waives service of notice of rule for
Respondent-State of Gujarat.
2. The present application has been filed seeking
condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
3. The present applicant came to be convicted by 6 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhidham-Kutch in Special
(Atrocity) Case No. 06/2012 dated 13.07.2016 for the offence
punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (for
short, 'the IPC') and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment
for a period of 7 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, one year simple imprisonment has been
ordered. Further, the present applicant is also convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and ordered to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 25,000/-
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14910/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2023
undefined
and in default of payment of fine, three years rigorous
imprisonment has been ordered. Further, the present applicant
is also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324
of the IPC and ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
three years and fir of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of
fine, six months imprisonment has been ordered. Further, the
present applicant is also convicted for the offence punishable
under Sections 3(1)(11) & 3(1)(12) of the Atrocity Act and
ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and
fine of Rs. 1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, simple
imprisonment for a period of one year has been ordered.
Further, the present applicant is also convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 3(2)(5) of the Atrocity Act and
ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of
Rs. 25,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, simple
imprisonment for a period of three years has been ordered.
The order of conviction was passed on 13.07.2016.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that
after the judgment and order of conviction was passed, the
family members of the present applicant contacted the local
advocate with regard to filing captioned criminal appeal before
this Court wherein local advocate has advised for filing criminal
appeal before this Court.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted
that the present applicant was going through some financial
constraints on account of which the captioned appeal could not
be preferred in time. He has further submitted submitted that
the applicant had to approach the Legal Aid Authority with a
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14910/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/12/2023
undefined
view to get Legal Aid and thereafter, the captioned appeal was
prepared. He has submitted that the delay in preferring the
captioned criminal appeal is neither intentional nor willful but
for the aforesaid reasons and thus, the delay may be
condoned.
6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent- State has
opposed the present application, looking to the delay caused in
filing the appeal and the nature of offence committed by the
applicant convict. Thus, it is urged that the delay may not be
condoned.
7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned
advocate for the applicant, the avernments made in the
application and since the applicant is assailing his conviction
and is in jail since 22.11.2011, in the interest of justice, the
delay of 1785 days in filling Criminal Appeal, deserves to be
condoned.
8. The present application is allowed. The delay caused in
filling Criminal Appeal is hereby condoned. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
MAHESH/36
