Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, DEEPAK ROSHAN
Amar Yasar, son of Md. Feroz Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand through A.T.S. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Criminal Appeal (D.B.) (Filing) No. 26650 of 2025 is directed against the order dated 17.07.2025, arising out of ATS P.S. Case No.06/2025, registered for the offences under Sections 461 (2)/113(i)(a)(iii)/152 of B.N.S. and under Sections 16/18/18B/20 of UA(P) Act and Sections 25(1-b)a/26(2)/35 of the Arms Act, whereby the learned Trial Court has been pleased to extend the period of investigation of 60 days on petition filed by the I.O., which as per the petitioner, is in violation of provision of Section 187(2) of the B.N.S.S. Act.
3. After filing of the present appeal, an objection has been raised by the Registry that the Criminal Appeals (D.B.) has been filed after expiry of maximum statutory period of 90 days as provided under Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short “the NIA Act, 2008”).
4. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in view of Sections 21(1) and 21(4) of NIA Act, the matter of maintainability was referred to this Bench.
5. Pursuant thereto, the instant appeal has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ with the said objection that the case is barred by limitation since the sa
Appeals under NIA Act Section 21(5) filed beyond maximum 90 days are not maintainable; delay uncondonable as provision mandatory, excluding Limitation Act Section 5 application.
(1) Appeal – Limitation—Appellate Courts have power to condone delay beyond 90 days period, despite language of 2nd proviso to Section 21(5) of NIA Act, 2008.(2) NIA Act, as a whole, cannot said to b....
The judgment in Buhari @ Kichan Buhari's case is overruled, affirming that the limitation period under Section 21(5) of the NIA Act is mandatory and cannot be condoned beyond specified limits.
The court ruled that strict compliance with statutory time limits is mandatory, and substantial justice cannot override clear legislative provisions regarding delay in filing appeals.
The NIA Act expressly excludes the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and the word 'shall' in the proviso to Section 21(5) should be read as 'may' in certain appeals to avoid violation....
The court ruled that the 90-day limit for filing appeals under the National Investigation Agency Act is mandatory, and failure to comply renders the appeal not maintainable.
The law of limitation is to be strictly enforced, and parties, including the government, must provide sufficient cause for any delay in filing appeals; negligence or lack of bona fides will not justi....
The court emphasized that applications for condonation of delay must demonstrate sufficient cause, with negligence and lack of bona fides leading to dismissal.
The principle that the law of limitation must be strictly applied, and that any request for condonation of delay must be supported by a sufficient and reasonable explanation, which was not met in thi....
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
