Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/528/2025 on 23 September, 2025
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
No Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
23.09.2025
CRLA No.528 of 2025
With
IA No.1/2025
IA No.2/2025
IA No.3/2025
Hon'ble G. Narendar, C.J.
Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
Mr. Prateek Tripathi, learned Legal Aid
Counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned Brief Holder
for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. The application (I.A. No. 1 of 2025) is
preferred to condone the delay of 42 days in
preferring the instant criminal appeal.
4. It is an indisputable fact that the
appellant is undergoing incarceration
pursuant to a judgment of conviction dated
30.05.2025/31.05.2025 passed in Special
Sessions Trial No.92 of 2022.
5. The issue regarding condonation of
delay in appeals preferred by convicts has
been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 18045 of
2024, "Mahesh Singh Banzara vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh", and the Hon'ble Apex
Court has been pleased to observe in
paragraph nos. 5, 6 & 7 as under :
"5. Since the application seeking condonation of
delay has been dismissed, the appeal against
the judgment of conviction and sentence has
attained finality. Consequently, the appellant
has been deprived of his opportunity of
assailing the said conviction as well as
sentence.
6. In Dilip S. Dahaukar v. Kotak Mahindra Co.
Ltd., (2007) 6 SCC 528, this Court observed that
an appeal is indisputably a statutory right and
an offender who has been convicted is entitled
to avail the right of appeal which is provided for
under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure
Code. Right of Appeal from a judgment of
conviction affecting the liberty of a person
keeping in view the expansive definition of
Article 21 is also a Fundamental Right. It was
also observed in Rajendra v. State of
Rajasthan, (1982) 3 SCC 382 (2), that where the
appellant furnishes reasons for delay in filing
an appeal, the court would not dismiss the
appeal as time-barred without examining the
reasons for the delay. Hence, in light of the
above, it is evident that the right to appeal,
particularly when it concerns the liberty of an
individual, is a fundamental right under Article
21 of the Constitution. The High Court's order
dismissing the appeal solely due to delay,
without properly examining the reasons for the
delay, therefore, warrants reconsideration.
Hence, there is necessity of examining the
reasons for delay in filing an appeal since the
dismissal of the appeal based on mere
technicalities, without a substantive
assessment of the appellant's reasons, was
erroneous.
7. In the circumstances, we find that the ends of
justice would be subserved in the instant case if
the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 is set
aside. Consequently, the delay of 1637 days in
filing the Criminal Appeal No.1001/2021 is
condoned by allowing the application being I.A.
No.3780/2021."
6. In the light of the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court, the delay of 42 days
requires to be condoned, and is, accordingly,
condoned.
7. The Delay Condonation Application (IA
No.1 of 2025) as well as Exemption
Application (IA No.3 of 2025) stands allowed.
8. Heard.
9. Admit.
10. Objections to IA No.2 of 2025, if any, be
filed in four weeks.
11. Summon the TCR.
12. The Registry to prepare paper book and
furnish copy of the same to the Bench and to
the learned counsels.
13. List this case on 29.10.2025.
(Subhash Upadhyay,J.) (G. Narendar, C.J.)
23.09.2025 23.09.2025
KK/SS
