Gujarat High Court
Vishnubhai Vitthaldas Nayak vs State Of Gujarat on 14 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6898/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR RESTORATION) NO. 6898 of
2024
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2514 of 2008
==========================================================
VISHNUBHAI VITTHALDAS NAYAK,
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KAJAL SHINGADIYA FOR MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Applicant(s)
No. 1
MR JAY MEHTA, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 14/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Though endorsement on the cause list shows that Rule is
served on 23.04.2022, no one has appeared to oppose
this application either in-person or through an advocate.
2. This application is filed praying to recall the order dated
04.08.2022 passed by this Court and consequence there
of and further prayed to restore the criminal appeal
No.2514 of 2008 to its original file.
3. Learned advocate Ms.Kajal Shingadiya submits that
against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6,
Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.159 of 2007, the
above mentioned Criminal Appeal i.e. No.2514 of 2008
was filed before this Court. The aforesaid appeal was
admitted vide order dated 16.02.2009 and thereafter
adjourned time to time for one or another ground. Lastly,
on 21.07.2022 the appeal was listed for final hearing
before this Court and it was mentioned by the learned
advocate that the applicant expired and thereafter he
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6898/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/06/2024
undefined
sought time to verify the said fact. On 04.08.2022
learned advocate for the applicant without ascertaining
the proper fact had made a wrong statement about the
death of the applicant though there was no any death
certificate produced on record before this Court. On
relying upon the statement made by the learned
advocate for the applicant, this Court vide order dated
04.08.2022 disposed of the above captioned appeal as
not pressed. Thereafter, the applicant herein met to the
learned advocate for his other legal work and on making
the inquiry and on getting the status of the appeal, he
came into the knowledge that the appeal was disposed of
by this Court on relying upon the statement made by the
learned advocate. In view thereof, the learned advocate
has prayed to restore the original criminal appeal to its
original file.
4. This Court has issued the notice of Rule, making it
returnable on 26.04.2024 and thereafter on that day the
matter was adjourned for providing one chance to the
respondent-accused to appear before this Court and the
same was adjourned for today.
5. Today also no one has appeared to oppose this
application either in-person or through an advocate.
6. Heard the learned advocate Ms.Shingadiya on behalf of
the learned advocate Mr.N.V.Gandhi for the applicant.
7. It transpires from the record that the statement was
made by the learned advocate before this Court that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6898/2024 ORDER DATED: 14/06/2024
undefined
applicant expired and on the basis of the statement, the
aforesaid appeal was disposed of vide order dated
04.08.2022. It was observed by this Court that the liberty
is reserved in favour of the applicant to approach this
Court in case of difficulty.
8. At the stage of condonation of delay, the respondent-
accused was represented by the learned advocate
Mr.H.A.Qureshi with learned advocate Mr.R.J.Goswami
with learned advocate Mr.P.K.Nayak, however, during the
hearing of the present application, learned advocates did
not appear for respondent No.2.
9. It appears that without verifying the fact as well as
without calling for the death certificate, learned advocate
has made a statement with regard to the death of the
applicant and the matter was disposed of by this Court.
10. This Court is of the view that litigants should not
suffer on account of mistake of their advocates and
therefore, this application for restoration of Criminal
Appeal requires consideration.
11. Hence, present application is allowed. Criminal
Appeal No.2514 of 2008 is restored to its original file/s.
Registry is directed to list the Criminal Appeal in seriatim.
Rule is made absolute accordingly.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
M.M.MIRZA
