Vijju @ Vijay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3240 MP

                                                                         1
                                    IN       THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                                  BEFORE
                                                      HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
                                                         ON THE 22 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                                        CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8015 of 2022

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   VIJJU @ VIJAY S/O RAMESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 26
                                   YE A R S , R/O B NEW 57 ARAH MACHINE ROAD
                                   BAIRAGARH DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                        .....APPELLANT
                                   (BY SHRI SUNDARAM SINGH - ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                                   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PLOICE
                                   STATION   PIPARIYA  DISTRICT  HOSHANGABAD
                                   (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                      .....RESPONDENT
                                   (BY SHRI PANKAJ RAJ - PANEL LAWYER)

                                            This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                           ORDER

Heard on I.A. No.18756 of 2022 - an application for condonation of

delay.

The appeal is barred by 3345 days.

It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in jail and his family members are poor and they could not get the certified copy of the impugned judgment. It is further contended that the appellant was already in

Signature Not Verified custody in connection with other case in ST No.23 of 2011. Due to lack of SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA communication with the previous counsel, the appeal could not be filed. SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2023.02.23 17:33:33 IST

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer and

submitted that the appellant is a habitual offender and such an enormous delay is not liable to be condoned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. The appellant was also convicted in connected with another case. In this case, there is inordinate delay of 3345 days which has not been properly explained by the appellant. No proper reason or plausible ground has been mentioned warranting condonation of delay.

Hence, I.A. No.18756 of 2022 is hereby dismissed. As the application for condonation of delay has been rejected, resultantly, the appeal is also dismissed being barred by limitation.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE ks

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Date: 2023.02.23 17:33:33 IST