Amita Patra @ Jena vs State Of Odisha
2023 Latest Caselaw 7567 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                              CRLREV NO.317 OF 2023
            Amita Patra @ Jena                                        Petitioner
                                                          Mr.B.R.Dalai Advocate
                                          -versus-
            State of Odisha                          ....             Opp. Party
                                                            Mr.D.K.Misha, AGA
                    CORAM:
                    MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

                                     ORDER

13.07.2023 CRLREV NO.317 OF 2023 AND Order No. I.A. NO.465 OF 2023

01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement (virtual/physical) mode.

2. This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 2511 days, i.e., 6 years, 10 months and 21 days in preferring the Revision.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was all along on bail during Trial as also pending the Appeal. He further submits that the impugned judgment was pronounced by the Appellate Court on 07.05.2016 and since the concerned lawyer did not inform the Petitioner about the result of the Appeal, he could not take further step to file the Revision and he was arrested and taken to custody, he filed the Revision after abstaining the copies of the judgment. According to him, the delay in filing the Criminal Revision beyond the statutory period is neither deliberate nor intentional. He, therefore, prays condoning the delay by taking a liberal view in the matter.

4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the move citing the length of delay of more than 6 and ½ years.

// 2 //

5. Considering the submissions and on going through the averments taken in the Application; the grounds as stated by the learned counsel for the Appellant for condonation of delay in filing the Criminal Revision are per se not acceptable. On a close reading of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay in filing the Criminal Revision, it is found that the application does not disclose any satisfactory explanation for such long delay in filing the Criminal Revision. There is complete absence of sufficient cause to condone the delay. In fact, the Petitioner, having managed to avoid the process of law for a period of more than six years after pronouncement of the judgment in the Appeal and having sat over the matter for a long time by not filing the Revision, it is now filed.

In that view of the matter this Court is not inclined to condone the long delay of 6 years, 10 months and 21 days in filing the Criminal Revision.

6. The I.A. is accordingly dismissed.

7. Consequently, the CRLREV is dismissed being barred by limitation.

(D. Dash) Judge.

Narayan

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: NARAYAN HO Designation: Peresonal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 19-Jul-2023 14:47:05