Gujarat High Court
Milapsinh S/O Shersinh Chandulal ... vs State Of Gujarat on 12 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10195/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY)
NO. 10195 of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 19671 of 2025
==========================================================
MILAPSINH S/O SHERSINH CHANDULAL BRAHMAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNJ SAVALIYA(12918) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 12/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY)
1. Heard Mr. Pratik Barot, Learned Counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Tirthraj Pandya, Learned APP for the
respondent no.1/State and Mr. Nikunj Savaliya,
learned Counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3.
2. The petitioner is Care Health Insurance Company
Limited, represented by its Corporate Manager. The
petitioner has filed the appeal against the judgment of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10195/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2025
undefined
acquittal. According to the case of the petitioner, seven
policies were taken in the name of the deceased for
total sum of Rs.2.10 Crores and in order to claim the
said insurance money, the respondent nos.2 and 3
herein have committed murder of the deceased and
created it as an accident. However, in a case registered
against them under Section 302 of IPC, it is stated that
they were acquitted by the trial Court erroneously.
Therefore, feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of
acquittal, the Insurance Company being the victim as
defined under Section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C, preferred appeal
against the said judgment of acquittal.
3. There is a delay of 47 days for filing the appeal.
According to the petitioner, the said delay took place in
obtaining necessary permission to prefer an appeal
from the hierarchy of authorities of the Insurance
Company. Since the petitioner/appellant is a health
insurance company, some leeway is to be shown as the
file has to run from table to table for obtaining
necessary permission to prefer an appeal from the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10195/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2025
undefined
hierarchy of officers. Therefore, the petitioner has
assigned satisfactory explanation and reasons for the
delay that took place in preferring the appeal. No
serious objection was also raised by the learned APP
for the State and learned Counsel for the respondent
nos. 2 and 3 except taking a formal objection relating
to the prayer made by the petitioner to condone the
delay.
4. Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the
case, the petition is allowed condoning the delay of 47
days in preferring the appeal.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
Anuj
