The State Of Jharkhand And Another vs Shivendu Pathak & Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 3914 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

The State Of Jharkhand And Another vs Shivendu Pathak & Another on 13 June, 2025

Author: Rajesh Shankar

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             L.P.A. No. 90 of 2023
The State of Jharkhand and Another        ... Appellants
                         Versus
Shivendu Pathak & Another                 .... Respondents
                         ---------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
                         ---------
For the Appellants:      Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, S.C. (L&C)-I
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate
                         Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate
                         ---------
Reserved on: 10.06.2025              Pronounced on: 13 /06/2025
Per M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.

I.A. No. 4610 of 2024

1. This application is filed by the applicants under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 601 days in filing the Letters

Patent Appeal challenging judgment dt. 27.07.2022 in W.P.(S) No. 1404 of

2016 passed by the learned Single Judge.

2. The said period of delay for the most part appears to be on account of the

late filing of the certified copy of the impugned judgment, copy of which was

applied on 29.3.2023 and was secured on 10.4.2023, though the Appeal itself

was filed on 22.02.2023.

3. It is stated in the application seeking condonation of delay that on

18.1.2023 the applicants-Department came to know about the status of the Writ

Petition which was allowed by the learned Single Judge; on 24.1.2023, the

record of the file was sent to the Law Department for its opinion; on 24.1.2023

the Law Department forwarded the file to the Advocate General and on

25.1.2023, he had given an opinion. It is stated that on 30.1.2023 the applicants-

Department proceeded for preparation of the grounds of Appeal, and on

-1 of 2- 7.2.2023 it authorized an officer to file Letters Patent Appeal, and on 22.2.2023

the L.P.A. was filed. It is stated that the certified copy which has been obtained

was filed on 18.4.2024. It is contended that if the delay is counted upto the date

of filing of the L.P.A. on 22.02.2023, the delay is not much and may be

excused.

4. If the delay is counted from the date of the impugned judgment till the

date of filing of the L.P.A. it appears to be only 175 days. Now doubt because of

the delay in filing the certified copy on 18.4.2024, the delay ballooned 601 days.

5. Though the delay in filing the certified copy has not been properly

explained, the delay between the date of the judgment and the date of filing of

the L.P.A. cannot be said to be inordinate taking into account the fact that the

applicants-Department claims to have come to know about the fate of the Writ

Petition on 18.1.2023.

6. Though the sole respondent has opposed the condonation of delay by

contending that the reasons given for seeking such condonation are false,

misleading and lack bonafides, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we

are of the opinion that the delay has been sufficiently explained and because it is

not inordinate and occurred on account of certain procedures which are required

to be followed, the delay in filing the L.P.A. is condoned and the I.A. No. 4610

of 2024 is allowed.

7. List under the heading for 'Admission' on 15th July, 2025.

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

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) VK

-2 of 2-