Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
The State (GNCT of Delhi) – Appellant
Versus
Mukesh – Respondent
Cr.L.P. 325 of 2023
Decided On : 07-07-2023
Condonation of Delay - Criminal Appeal - The court dismissed the appeal seeking condonation of delay in filing the Criminal Leave Petition due to the huge delay and lack of plausible explanation for the delay caused between March 2021 and June 2023.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant/State sought condonation of delay of 439 days in filing the Criminal Leave Petition against the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court, which dismissed the case of the prosecution for failure to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appeal was filed with a delay of 439 days, and despite the direction to consider the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 out of limitation due to the COVID-19 pandemic, no plausible explanation was provided for the delay caused between March 2021 and June 2023. The court dismissed the application, finding no merit in it.
Issues: Condonation of delay in filing the Criminal Leave Petition, huge delay and lack of plausible explanation for the delay caused between March 2021 and June 2023.
Ratio Decidendi: The appeal sought to be preferred was found to be hit by huge delay and latches, and no plausible explanation was put forward by the appellant/State for the delay caused between March 2021 and June 2023.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application seeking condonation of delay and rejected the appeal.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 17439/2023
1. By way of the present application, appellant/State seeks condonation of delay of 439 days in filing the present Criminal Leave Petition against the impugned judgment dated 06.02.2020 passed by Dr.Archana Sinha, Additional Sessions Judge-06, West Tis Hazari Courts Complex, Delhi in case in Original/Main Charge-sheet in FIR No. 1029/2015 dated 14.07.2015, Police Station Tilak Nagar, Delhi registered under Sections 376/506 of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act whereby the learned Trial Court has dismissed the case of the prosecution holding that the appellant/prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Pertinently, the appeal against the impugned judgment dated 06.02.2020 was to be filed within statutory period of 90 days.
3. Upon hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/State and on perusal of application, this Court finds that the file of the present case was marked to the then learned APP, Ms. Neelam Sharma on 09.11.2020 for drafting the appeal, however, since her tenure was coming to an end, she was unable to draft it due to paucity of time. Thereafter, the file was marked to learned APP, Ms.Manjeet Arya and the appeal was prepared and filed on 05.06.2023 with a delay of 439 days.
4. Relevantly, this Court is conscious that due to COVID-19 pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo motto Writ Petition (C) No.3/2020 directed the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 to be considered out of limitation. However, the present appeal has been filed only in June, 2023 and no plausible explanation has been put forward by appellant/State for delay caused between March, 2021 till June, 2023. In the considered opinion of this Court, the appeal sought to be preferred is hit by huge delay and latches.
5. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present application and the same is dismissed.
CRL.L.P 325/2023 & CRL.M.A.17438/2023
6. In view of order passed in CRL.M.A. 17439/2023, the appeal and application are rejected.
The court emphasized the importance of providing a plausible explanation for delay in filing appeals and considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on limitation periods.
Failure to adequately explain a delay of 462 days in filing a Criminal Leave Petition can lead to the dismissal of the application seeking condonation of delay.
The court emphasized the impact of huge delay and latches in seeking condonation of delay, despite the consideration of the period during the COVID-19 pandemic as out of limitation.
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on limitation periods and the requirement for a plausible explanation for delay in filing appeals.
The court emphasized the importance of providing a plausible explanation for substantial delay in filing a petition and considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on limitation periods.
The court emphasized the importance of timely filing of appeals and the need for justifiable grounds for appeal, especially when the grounds existed at the time of trial and acquittal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that inordinate delay in filing an appeal, without justifiable grounds, may lead to the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay.
Administrative delay is not a ground for condoning delay, and a sufficient cause must be shown to condone delay in filing an appeal against an order of acquittal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
