Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD
Rajendra Soren, S/o Mahadev Soren – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(SANJAY PRASAD, J.)
I.A. No. 5233 of 2025
I.A. No. 5233 of 2025 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 212 days in filing the instant Cr. Revision No. 459 of 2025.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is delay of 212 days in filing the Cr. Revision No. 459 of 2025. It is submitted that the petitioner is a poor person. It is submitted that the petitioner was not aware regarding the dismissal of the Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2023 vide judgment 05.06.2024 and he was arrested on 27.02.2025, then he came to know about the impugned judgment and thereafter the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Revision Application after delay of 212 days and as such, delay of 212 days in preferring the instant Criminal Revision Application may be condoned.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that reasons assigned by the petitioner is not sufficient and prayer for delay may be rejected.
5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and also -in view of the averments made in para 4 to 8 of the i
The court condoned a 212-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision Application based on the petitioner's financial hardship and ignorance of prior judgments, granting provisional bail during the appeal....
Delay in filing appeals may be excused under the Limitation Act when supported by justifiable reasons, and prolonged custody may warrant bail during pending revisions.
The court emphasized that delays due to incarceration can justify condoning application timing, especially amid disputes over complaint legitimacy.
The court condoned a 588-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision under the Limitation Act due to the petitioner's custody and financial constraints, emphasizing leniency in such circumstances.
The court ruled that the applicant's delay of 1074 days in filing a revision petition was unjustified due to lack of sufficient cause, emphasizing the importance of adhering to limitation laws.
The court condoned a 182-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision due to compromise and allowed the substitution of legal heirs following the death of a party, emphasizing leniency in procedural matte....
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
