IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Chandan Kumar Saha, S/o. Santosh Kumar Saha - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Opp. Parties
Cr. Revision No. 795 of 2024
Decided On : 21-01-2025
(A) Limitation Act - Section 5 - Criminal Procedure Code - Sections 438 and 442 - Delay in filing Criminal Revision - Delay of 182 days condoned due to circumstances of compromise and lack of objection from parties - Substitution of legal heirs allowed following the death of original party - Bail granted considering time served and readiness to compromise. (Paras 2, 6, 19, 24)
(B) Criminal Procedure - Substitution of parties - Legal heirs may be substituted in place of deceased parties upon unanimous resolution of heirs. (Paras 10, 15)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed an application for condoning a delay of 182 days in filing a Criminal Revision after being convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The original opposite party no. 2 died, and his legal heirs unanimously resolved to substitute their mother in his place. (Paras 3, 10)
Findings of Court:
The delay in filing the Criminal Revision was condoned, and the legal heirs were substituted as requested. The petitioner was granted bail considering the time already served. (Paras 6, 24)
Issues: The main issues included the condonation of delay in filing the revision and the substitution of legal heirs following the death of a party. (Paras 2, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the leniency in procedural matters when parties are in agreement and the importance of allowing substitutions to ensure justice is served. (Paras 6, 15)
Result: Applications allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
I. A. No. 6753 of 2024
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
2. The instant I.A. No. 6753 of 2024 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 182 days in filing the instant Cr. Revision No. 795 of 2024.
3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is delay of 182 days in filing the Cr. Revision No. 795 of 2024. It is submitted that a cheque of Rs. 50,000/- was dishonored and after dismissal of this Criminal Revision, the petitioner is in custody since 14.06.2024 and the petitioner is ready to compromise the case with the opposite party no. 2 and as such, delay of 182 days in preferring the instant Criminal Revision Application may be condoned.
4. Learned counsel for the State raised no objection.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 also raised no objection.
6. Having gone through the averments made at para- 4 and 5 of the instant Interlocutory Application and also considering the factum of compromise and taking lenient view, the delay of 182 days in preferring the instant Cr. Revision No. 795 of 2024 is, hereby, condoned.
7. I.A. No. 6753 of 2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
I. A. No. 11085 of 2024
8. The instant I.A. No. 11085 of 2024 has been filed by the opposite party no. 2 for substitution of Legal Heirs of opposite party no. 2, Rameshwar Saha, who died on 11.11.2022.
9. Heard learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the petitioner.
10. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 that the original opposite party no. 2 namely Rameshwar Saha had died on 11.11.2022 leaving behind his widow namely Sushila Devi and two sons namely Dhananjay Saha and Kokil Chandra Saha and three married daughters namely (1) Lakshmi Devi, (2) Jharna Devi and (3) Baby Devi and all the sons and daughters have unanimously resolved that their mother would be substituted in place of their father namely Rameshwar Saha as opposite party no. 2 in this Criminal Revision Application and hence, this Interlocutory Application may be allowed.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State raised no objection.
12. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of this Criminal Revision.
13. It appears that the original opposite party no. 2 namely Rameshwar Saha had died on 11.11.2022 leaving behind his widow namely Sushila Devi and two sons namely Dhananjay Saha and Kokil Chandra Saha and three married daughters namely (1) Lakshmi Devi, (2) Jharna Devi and (3) Baby Devi and all the sons and daughters have unanimously resolved that their mother would be substituted in place of their father namely Rameshwar Saha as opposite party no. 2 in this Criminal Revision Application.
14. It also appears that the original opposite party no. 2 namely Rameshwar Saha had died on 11.11.2022 during the pendency of Criminal Appeal before the Appellate Court, however, steps for substitution had not been taken them.
15. Having gone through the averments made at para- 4 5 and 6 of the instant Interlocutory Application and taking lenient view, Let the wife of the opposite party no. 2 namely Sushila Devi be substituted in place of the original opposite party no. 2 Rameshwar Saha.
16. Thus, I.A. No. 11085 of 2024 stands allowed and disposed of.
17. The learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is directed to substitute the name of the original opposite party no. 2 namely Rameshwar Saha by red ink and the office is directed to maintain the record properly.
I. A. No. 6754 of 2024
18. The instant I.A. No. 6754 of 2024 has been filed under Sections 438 and 442 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail during pendency of the present Criminal Revision.
19. The present Criminal Revision has been filed under Sections 438 and 442 of BNSS by th
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....
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 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....
The court condoned a significant delay in filing a revision application and granted bail based on the petitioner's lengthy custody and the circumstances of the case.
A court may grant bail considering the duration of custody, despite serious charges, when supported by comparable cases.
The court condoned the delay in filing a Criminal Revision Application and granted bail to the petitioner, emphasizing the need for conditions to prevent further criminal conduct.
The court emphasized that delays due to incarceration can justify condoning application timing, especially amid disputes over complaint legitimacy.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.