JUDGMENT :

Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.

I.A. No.01 of 2021

This interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed for condoning the delay of 7 years 4 months and 19 days caused in filing the appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘CrPC’) against the judgment dated 23.05.2014 passed by the learned adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge-2nd, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.142 of 2009/176 of 2008 (SJ) arising out of Fatehpur P.S. Case No.75 of 2005 whereby the respondent nos. 2 to 4 have been acquitted from the charges framed against them under Section 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

2. Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant being the informant of Fatehpur P.S. Case No.75 of 2005 was never noticed with regard to the proceedings of the trial on any occasion. He contended that on 20.12.2019, a puja was organized in the house of respondent nos.2 to 4 where the appellant and his family members were also invited. The appellant wanted to know the reason as to why puja was organized. On query, he came to know that the case which he had instituted against respondent nos.2 to 4 by him had ended into acquittal. Thereafter, he approached an advocate at Gaya who informed him about the factual status of the trial. He told him that the trial had ended into acquittal of respondent nos. 2 to 4 on 23.05.2014.

3. Mr. Durgesh Nandan further contended that the informant requested the learned advocate to obtain certified copy of the judgment for which a requisition was filed on 02.01.2020. The certified copy of the judgment was supplied to him on 12.03.2020. Thereafter, he took legal opinion from the same lawyer at Gaya. He advised him to challenge the judgment of acquittal before the High Court. He contended that due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic in the month of March 2020, the Government of India ordered a nationwide lockdown limiting movement from one place to another as a result of which the appeal could not be filed. Subsequently, on 27.09.2021, the appellant approached a lawyer at Patna and paid the expenses and legal fee for filing the appeal against the judgment of acquittal whereafter the appeal could be filed before this Court on 15.11.2021. He contended that since the date of knowledge, i.e. 12.03.2020, the delay in filing the appeal is only 1 year, 3 months and 26 days. He submitted that the delay caused in filing the appeal was neither willful nor deliberate. It could not be filed within the stipulated period because of the circumstances enumerated above. He contended that the appellant has good grounds on merit and he is ready to adduce evidence before the court if an opportunity would be granted to him.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submitted that the appellant appears to be a close agnate of respondent nos. 2 to 4. After framing of the charges, the case was adjourned to several dates for examination of witnesses on behalf of the prosecution. The trial court took all possible steps to ensure appearance of the witnesses. However, for almost six years, no witness turned up to depose before the trial court and under such compelling circumstance, the trial court closed the prosecution case and acquitted the accused respondents in exercise of powers conferred under Section 232 of the CrPC. He submitted that no plausible explanation has been given by the appellant for the delay of 7 years 4 months and 19 days caused in filing the appeal.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

6. The appellant is the informant of Fatehpur P.S. Case No.75 of 2005 registered under Section 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. In the first information report, he had stated that he is a khalasi in Railway and posted at Gajhandi. On 09.05.2005, he came to his house after