The Chhattisgarh High Court admitted the petition, condoned a 69-day delay referencing State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani, allowed leave to appeal as the case appeared debatable, and called for the record.
Leave to appeal allowed; result remittted to trial court for final disposal after recording evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order Sheet
CRMP No. 1455 of 2017
State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Dilip Kumar & others
| 23.08.2018 | Mr. Sanjeev Pandey, G.A. for the State/ petitioner. |
|---|---|
| Mr. Vivek Singhal, counsel for respondents No. 1, 2 & 4. Mr. Dev Ashish Biswas, counsel for respondent No. 3. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2017, application for condonation of delay in filing the petition. For the reasons mentioned in the application and as held by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matter ofState of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani & othersreported in (1996) 3 SCC 132, the delay of 69 days in filing the petition is condoned. Also heard on admission. Admit. Also heard on application for granted of leave to appeal filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Looking to the evidence adduced by the prosecution before the trial court, the case is appearing to be debatable. Hence, the application for grant of leave to appeal is allowed. Registry is directed to register the case as regular Acquittal Appeal. Call for the record of the court below within four weeks. List the case for final hearing in its due course. |
|
Sd/- (Ram Prasanna Sharma) Judge |
Arun
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone the delay of 69 days in filing the regular acquittal appeal.
Whether to grant leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC, 1973.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani & othersDistinguished¶4
State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani & others reported in (1996) 3 SCC 132 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Chhattisgarh
Dilip Kumar
Ram Prasanna Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
