Lrs Of Govind Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 14249 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1513/2022

1. Lrs Of Govind Singh, S/o Gamdur Singh 1/1. Jasvinder Kaur W/o Govind Singh, Aged About 51 Years, B/c Bazigar, R/o Chak 1 Ppm Gandheli, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

1/2. Sukhvir Kaur D/o Govind Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Daraj, Tehsil Tappa, District Barnala (Punjab) 1/3. Bakshis Singh S/o Govind Singh, Aged About 26 Years, B/c Bazigar, R/o Chak 1 Ppm, Gandheli, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

1/4. Sawan S/o Govind Singh, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Bazigar, R/o Chak 1 Ppm, Gandheli, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

1/5. Ronuka Singh S/o Govind Singh, Aged About 19 Years, B/c Bazigar, R/o Chak 1 Ppm, Gandheli, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

1/6. Ramandeep Kaur D/o Govind Singh, Aged About 14 Years, B/c Bazigar, R/o Chak 1 Ppm, Gandheli, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh. Through Her Natural Guardian Jaswinder Kaur W/o Govind Singh.

                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr. B.R. Jajra for
                                 Mr. Rakesh Matoria
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                     Order

05/12/2022

By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition, the

legal representatives of accused-petitioner Govind Singh

(2 of 3) [CRLR-1513/2022]

challenged the legality of the order dated 18.10.2022 passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2 Nohar, District

Hanumangarh in Criminal Appeal No.91/2022 by which the

application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed by the

petitioners has been dismissed and appeal has also been

dismissed on count of delay. The petitioners filed the application

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in

filing the appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of

sentence passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Nohar vide judgment dated 26.04.2018 in Criminal

Case No.562/2016 (337/2006) with a view to remove the stigma

of conviction on accused Govind Singh who passed away

subsequent to judgment of conviction.

The petitioners filed an appeal alongwith an application

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in

filing the appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge

No.2, Nohar, District Hanumangarh averring therein that the

accused-Govind Singh was convicted and sentenced by the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar vide judgment

dated 26.04.2018 and he (Govind Singh) expired on 11.05.2018,

thus, they were unable to file an appeal within the limitation

period. The learned appellate Court dismissed the application

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as well as appeal against

conviction filed by the LRs of Govind Singh on the ground of it

being time barred.

The plea of the petitioners is that they came to know only

upon issuance of warrant of recovery of Rs.14,000/- and they

were not aware regarding the exact date of passing of the

judgment. The Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal on the

(3 of 3) [CRLR-1513/2022]

ground of limitation. Since the main accused-Govind Singh, who

was convicted and sentenced, passed away on 11.05.2018 and

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence was passed on

26.04.2018, therefore, the possibility that the petitioners were not

aware of the fact of passing of judgment dated 26.04.2018 cannot

be discarded, since the legal representatives i.e. the petitioners

were not party before the trial Court, there is no contrary material

available on record to infer that the petitioners were having

knowledge regarding culmination of trial.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case,

this Court is of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the

petitioners for filing the appeal belatedly cannot be discarded on

assumptions.

Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. The

order dated 18.10.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge No.2, Nohar, District Haunmangarh in Criminal Appeal

No.91/2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is

remanded back to the learned Appellate Court with the direction

to hear the appeal on merits afresh and then pass a fresh order.

(FARJAND ALI),J 166-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)