Smt Ritu Saxena vs Vipin Kumar Saxena
2021 Latest Caselaw 948 MP

   1     THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  Criminal Revision No.799/2021
       Smt. Ritu Saxena Vs. Vipin Kumar Saxena and others

Gwalior, Dated:22/03/2021

       Shri Pramod Kumar Sharma, Advocate for applicant.

       This Criminal Revision under Sections 397, 401 of Cr.P.C. has

been filed against the order dated 12/2/2021 passed by Tenth

Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in case No.13/2020, by which

the application filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act has been rejected.

       The necessary facts for disposal of the present revision in short

are that the respondents were tried for offence under Sections 354,

354D, 506, 498A of IPC on the complaint lodged by the applicant.

By judgment and sentence dated 3/10/2019 the respondents no.1 and

2 were convicted under Sections 354, 354C of IPC, whereas the

respondent no.3 was acquitted of all the charges and the respondents

no.1 and 2 were acquitted of the charge under Section 506 of IPC.

The respondents no.1 and 2 were sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment of one year and a fine of Rs.500/-. It appears that the

applicant preferred an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. against the

impugned judgment and sentence dated 3/10/2019 alongwith an

application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

It was the case of the applicant that the counsel for the

applicant had received the certified copy of the judgment on

17/10/2019, but the information of the same was not given to the 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Criminal Revision No.799/2021 Smt. Ritu Saxena Vs. Vipin Kumar Saxena and others

applicant and it was informed that during the cleaning process on

account of Diwali festival, he has misplaced the same and

accordingly, on 4/1/2020 her counsel informed that he has received

the copy and accordingly, she came to know that the respondents no.1

and 2 have been awarded less sentence, whereas they have been

acquitted for offence under Section 506 of IPC and accordingly, she

requested her counsel to file an appeal. Since the applicant was not in

a position to pay the professional fee of the advocate, therefore, he

refused to file an appeal.

The appellate court after inspecting the record, held that in fact

the husband of the applicant himself had filed an application for

granting certified copy on 4/10/2019, which was received by the

husband of the applicant on 14/10/2019, whereas the appeal has been

filed on 15/1/2020. Thus, the appellate court found that the reason

assigned by the applicant in her application under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act was false and, therefore, it was held that the applicant

has failed to make out any sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

The counsel for the applicant could not rebut the findings

given by the appellate court that it was the husband of the applicant,

who had applied for grant of certified copy on 4/10/2019 and the

copy was received by the husband of the applicant on 14/10/2019.

Thus, it is clear that the applicant in order to make out sufficient 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Criminal Revision No.799/2021 Smt. Ritu Saxena Vs. Vipin Kumar Saxena and others

cause for condonation of delay had levelled false allegation against

an advocate, which cannot be appreciated.

Be that whatever it may.

Since the applicant has failed to make out any sufficient cause

for not filing the appeal within a period of limitation, therefore, this

Court is of the considered opinion that the appellate court did not

commit any mistake by rejecting the application filed under Section 5

of the Limitation Act.

Accordingly, the revision fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2021.03.23 17:52:20 +05'30'