Vijay Kumar Tiwari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 5132 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Vijay Kumar Tiwari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 24 April, 2025

Author: Rajesh Shankar

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

                                                                   2025:JHHC:12124-DB




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      I.A. No. 252 of 2025
                              In/And
                       L.P.A. No. 26 of 2025
     Vijay Kumar Tiwari, aged about 54 years, son of Late Ramjit Tiwari,
     Resident of Village-Sahijana, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa, District- Garhwa,
     Jharkhand                  ..    ...  ...   Appellant
                              Versus
     1. The State of Jharkhand
     2. The Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S.-Garhwa, District-
        Garhwa
     3. Sub Divisional Officer, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S.-Garhwa, District-
        Garhwa
     4. The Circle Officer, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S. -Garhwa, District- Garhwa
     5. Dharmendra Kumar Upadhyay, aged about 45 years, son of Ganesh
        Dutt Upadhyay, Resident of Village- Sahijana, P.O. & P.S. Garhwa,
        District- Garhwa
     6. Kamakhaya Narayan Singh, son of Ram Prasad Singh, Resident of
        Ward No. 14, Muhalla-Sahijna, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa, District-
        Garhwa                              ... ...     Respondents
                              ---------
     CORAM:          HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
                              ---------
     For the Appellants : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate
     For the Respondents:     Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III

                            --------
     Reserved on: 15.04.2025                  Pronounced on: 24 / 4 /2025
     M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.(Oral)

1) I.A. No. 252 of 2025 is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act, 1963 by the applicant to condone the delay of 377 days in filing the

Letters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment dt. 8.8.2023 of the learned

Single Judge passed in W.P.(C) No. 1000 of 2023.

2) In the application filed seeking condonation of delay, the applicant had

contended that the applicant believed that further steps can only be taken

2025:JHHC:12124-DB

after the proceeding under section 147 Cr.P.C. pending before the respondent

no. 3 are disposed of.

3) It is contended that the applicant is prevented by sufficient cause in

contesting the matter in different courts for protecting only the existing road

said to be located in Government land. It is stated that the delay of 377 days

occurred due to wrong legal advice given by the counsel and the delay is not

intentional.

4) We are not satisfied that the reason assigned by the applicant for not

approaching the Division Bench by filing a Letters Patent Appeal against the

judgment of the learned single Judge is a valid reason. Merely because some

proceeding before respondent no.3 is pending, there is no reason for the

applicant to wait till the same is disposed of. In fact, what is that proceeding,

when was it disposed of and why even after its disposal there was a delay in

approaching the Court is not pointed out by the applicant.

5) Clearly the applicant has been negligent in taking steps to file the

Letters Patent Appeal within the time permitted by law for challenging the

judgment of learned single Judge.

6) Therefore, we do not find any merit in this application.

           7)      It is accordingly dismissed.

           8)     Consequently, the Letters Patent Appeal is also dismissed.

           9)    All pending applications shall stand closed.



                                                    (M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)


                                                        (Rajesh Shankar, J.)
N.A.F.R.
Sharda/-