The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Sonu Pal
2022 Latest Caselaw 518 MP

                               1
           THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    MCRC No.36596/2020
                   State of M.P. vs. Sonu Pal

                     Through video conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 11/01/2022

      Shri Naval Kishore Gupta, Counsel for the applicant/State.

      None for respondent though served.

Heard on I.A.No.17132/2020, an application under Section 5

of Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

It is mentioned in the application that the delay of 312 days has

occurred on account of procedural requirements as well as on account

of nation wide lock-down due to Covid-19 pandemic. It is submitted

that it is true that the period of limitation had already expired prior to

imposition of nation wide lock-down but if the period from 24.3.2020

till 24.9.2020 is excluded, then it is clear that the period of delay

would not be of more than 100 days. It is further submitted that during

the lock-down, the entire Government machinery was busy in

maintaining law and order as well as in taking effective steps for

protection of the lives of the citizens of the country, therefore, the

question of condonation of delay may be considered sympathetically .

As none appears for the respondent although he has been

served, therefore, it is clear that the grounds raised by the applicant

have remained uncontroverted. Accordingly, considering the reasons

assigned in I.A.No.17132/2020, the delay in filing the application for

grant of leave to appeal is hereby condoned.

Also heard on the question of admission.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.36596/2020 State of M.P. vs. Sonu Pal

The record of the Court below has been received.

By this application, the applicant has sought leave to file appeal

against the judgment dated 8.8.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Karera, District Shivpuri in Criminal Case No.984/2013

by which the respondent has been acquitted for offence under Sections

2(15), 18, 27, 29, 39 (1)(d), 50 and 51 of Wild Life (Protection) Act.

It is submitted that the Court below has discarded the

prosecution evidence on flimsy grounds. The respondent was found

involved in illegal mining of sand.

Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the

applicant, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for

grant of leave to appeal. Accordingly, leave is granted.

The Office is directed to register the case as Criminal Appeal.

Issue bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty

Five Thousand Only) for appearance of the respondent on 4.4.2022.

With aforesaid observation, the MCRC is finally disposed of.

                                                               (G.S. Ahluwalia)
 (alok)                                                            Judge




ALOK KUMAR
2022.01.11 17:02:16 +05'30'