State of Sikkim vs Suresh Pradhan - 2023 Supreme(Sikk) 14

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Sikk) 14

THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
State of Sikkim – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Pradhan – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Yadev Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor.
For the Respondent:Mr. Umesh Ranpal, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel).

Table of Content
1. condonation of delay requires sufficient cause. (Para 1 , 4)
2. arguments for and against condonation of delay. (Para 2 , 3)
3. judicial approach to condonation of delay; substantial justice prioritized. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court allows delay; imposes costs for inefficiency. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

ORDER :

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. The Petitioner seeks condonation of sixty-six days delay in filing the Petition under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking Leave to Appeal.

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor urging this Court to condone the delay submitted that since the File was processed from one officer to the next officer right from the Court Inspector (C.I.) up to the highest authority of the State, consequently, despite the best efforts put in by the Prosecution the delay occurred in filing the application. He invited the attention of this Court to the decision of the Supreme Court in Esha Bhattacharjee vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and Others , (2013) 12 SCC 649 and contended that the principles applicable for condonation of delay have been elucidated therein. That, the Supreme Court has observed inter alia that t