Disposed¶8

Pawan Kumar v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC9 Apr 2024CRMPM/679/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delay condonation; six days' delay in filing appeal; applicant-appellant in jail; appeal admitted and records called for; Cr.MP(M) No. 679 of 2024; Cr. Appeal No. of 2024; Cr.MP ST No.2120 of 2024; Pawan Kumar vs. State of H.P.; notice waived by Additional Advocate General Baldev Negi; reply within three weeks; listing on 30.04.2024; Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Sushil Kukreja, JJ.; order dated 09.04.2024.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of six days' delay in filing of the appeal; the application stood disposed of; the appeal was admitted and directed to be registered with records called for; in the connected Cr.M.P. (Cr.MP ST No.2120 of 2024) notice was issued with waiver by the Additional Advocate General for the non-applicant-respondent and three weeks granted to file reply; matter listed before the appropriate Bench on 30.04.2024.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Hp — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the six days' delay that had crept up in filing of the appeal by the applicant-appellant, who is in jail, should be condoned in view of the reasons stated in the application.

¶8

Court's answer

The Court deemed it appropriate to condone the 6 days' delay that had crept up in filing of the appeal, coupled with the fact that the applicant-appellant is in jail, and ordered accordingly.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The appeal was admitted and the Court directed that the records be called for.

¶11

Key takeaways

Notice was issued in the connected Cr.M.P., upon which the learned Additional Advocate General for the non-applicant-respondent appeared and waived service of notice.ratio¶14
Three weeks' time was granted to the respondent-side to file its reply in the connected Cr.M.P.ratio¶14
The matter was ordered to be listed before the appropriate Bench on 30.04.2024.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 09.04.2024 in Cr.MP(M) No. 679 of 2024 (Pawan Kumar vs. State of H.P.), Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Sushil Kukreja, JJ.: For the reasons stated in the application coupled with the fact that the applicant-appellant was in jail, the Court condoned the six days' delay that had crept up in filing of the appeal and disposed of the delay-condonation application; the appeal was directed to be registered, was admitted, and the records were called for. In the connected Cr.M.P. No. of 2024 (Cr.MP ST No.2120 of 2024), the Court directed registration and issued notice; Mr. Baldev Negi, learned Additional Advocate General, appeared and waived service of notice on behalf of the non-applicant-respondent and was granted three weeks' time to file reply. The matter was listed before the appropriate Bench on 30.04.2024.

Pawan Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Geeta Ram Vs Hpsebl and Another

Meera Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Gaurav Mahajan Vs Union of India and Others

Roop Lal Vs State of Hp

Ram Dass Premi Vs State of Hp