Shehbaz Samir Saiyed On Behalf Of ... vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7767 Guj

                                                                             NEUTRAL CITATION




   R/CR.MA/15042/2023                          ORDER DATED: 19/10/2023

                                                                             undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
                        15042 of 2023

          In F/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 29933 of 2023

==========================================================
SHEHBAZ SAMIR SAIYED ON BEHALF OF GENERAL POLYTEX PRIVATE
                           LTD
                          Versus
                    STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NAUMAN S QURESHI(10669) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS CM SHAH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SHAISHAV S PANDIT(7363) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

                          Date : 19/10/2023

                           ORAL ORDER

1. This is an application preferred by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying to condone the delay of 156 days in preferring the application seeking leave to prefer an appeal.

2. Learned advocate Mr.Nauman Qureshi submits that the applicant is newly appointed authorized person of original complainant-company. As initially, the complaint was filed by the Ex-authorized person, who left the company therefore, fresh resolution was passed by the company and he was authorized to conduct with the proceedings before the Court of Law. As he was newly appointed, some time was occurred in approaching to the concerned

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/15042/2023 ORDER DATED: 19/10/2023

undefined

advocate to file an application for seeking leave against the judgment and order of the acquittal passed by the learned trial Court.

3. This application was opposed by the learned advocate Mr.Shaishav Pandit for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on the ground that though the order of the dismissal was in the knowledge of the company, in the very lethargic approach they had filed an application without mentioning the proper cause for explaining delay.

4. Considering the arguments advanced by the parties, this Court Court is of the view that instead of deciding the matter, on the ground of delay, the Criminal Appeal which is filed challenging the judgment and order of acquittal is required to be decided on merits.

5. In view of the above, this Court deems it fit to allow this application. Hence, this application is allowed. Delay of 156 days in preferring the application seeking leave to prefer an appeal is condoned. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

(M. K. THAKKER,J) M.M.MIRZA