State of Hp Vs Sahab Ram

State of H.P. vs. Sahab Ram

C r.MP(M) No.1554 of 2024

11.09.2025 Present:

Mr. Mohinder Zharaick and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General, for the applicant-State.

¶5

Mr. Arun Sehgal, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶6

The applicant-state of H.P. has filed the

¶7

accompanying appeal, against the judgment of acquittal, dated 30.12.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’), in Corruption Case No. 3-D/VII/2016, titled as, ‘State versus Sahab Ram’, arising out of FIR No.7/2015, dated 11.09.2015 registered with Police Station SV&ACB, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.

¶8

Since, the appeal has been preferred after expiry of period, prescribed by the Limitation Act, as such, the present application has been filed, for condonation of delay.

¶9

As per the averments made in the application, delay in filing the appeal is 25 days. However, as per the report of the Registry, delay in filing the appeal is about 41 days.

¶10

Delay has been sought to be condoned mainly on the ground that learned trial Court has passed the judgment of acquittal on 30.12.2023 and the certified copy of the judgment

¶11

was received on 06.01.2024. The matter was examined by the District Attorney, SV&ACB, Northern Range, Dharamshala, who had proposed for filing the appeal before this Court. Thereafter, the matter was forwarded to ADG, SV&ACB, Himachal Pradesh, on 12.02.2024. The grounds of appeal were prepared by the District Attorney. Thereafter the matter was forwarded to ADG, SV&ACB Shimla, along with the proposal for filing the appeal. The matter was submitted to higher authorities on 04.03.2024 for obtaining the opinion of Law Department and opinion of the Law Department was received on 24.04.2024 and thereafter, the present appeal has been filed.

¶12

The delay in filing the appeal has been sought to be condoned mainly on the ground that the matter was dealt with by various authorities and thereafter, it has been decided to assail the judgment of acquittal, before this Court by filing the accompanying appeal.

¶13

On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application by condoning the delay. The application is duly supported by the affidavit of Additional Chief Secretary (Home), to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.

¶14

When put to notice, the application has been contested/resisted by the respondent by filing the reply, in which the preliminary objection has been taken that the application is totally false misleading, misconceived based upon imaginary and

¶15

concocted story, whereas, inordinate delay in filing the appeal is stated to be intentional and deliberate. It has further been pleaded that the applicant has cooked up a totally false story to mislead the Court and to get the inordinate delay condoned.

¶16

In addition to this, it has also been pleaded that no sufficient reason for filing the appeal, after the prescribed period of limitation has been pleaded.

¶17

On merits, the factual position has also been contested mainly on the ground that the application is totally silent about the fact, as to when, the copy of the judgment was applied and when it was prepared and attested.

¶18

All these facts have been pleaded to show that the story, which has been mentioned, in the application qua receiving the certified copy of the judgment is nothing, but, an afterthought story and hypothetical one.

¶19

According to the respondent, no cogent reason has been assigned in filing the appeal, after the prescribed period of limitation.

¶20

On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Arun Sehgal Advocate, has argued that the learned counsel appearing for the applicant has miserably failed to explain the delay in filing the appeal. The reply has duly been supported by the affidavit of the respondent.

¶21

13 Heard.

¶22

The stand of the applicant, in the present case, is that after passing of the judgment of acquittal, the copy was received on 06.01.2024. Meaning thereby, the certified copy was received, within a period of seven days from the passing of the judgment of acquittal, by the learned trial Court.

¶23

Admittedly, the matter has to be dealt with at various levels, as the decision to prefer the appeal was taken after the opinion of Law Department. Although, as per the stand as taken by the applicant, the District Attorney, SV&ACB, Himachal Pradesh has also given his opinion to assail the said judgment by way of filing the appeal against the judgment of acquittal, however, in the reply, the bonafide of the applicant has been challenged on the ground that the vague averments have been made. The reply is totally silent about the negligence and inaction on the part of the applicant.

¶24

Moreover, while deciding the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, this Court has to adopt a liberal approach, as the matter should be decided on merits, not on the technical grounds. Even otherwise, delay of 25 days, as pleaded in the application, and 41 days, as calculated by the Registry by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be inordinate delay.

¶25

Considering all these facts, the delay in filing the appeal is ordered to be condoned.

¶26

The application is, thus, disposed of.

¶27

Cr. Appeal No…….of 2025

¶28

Vide order of even date, passed in Cr.MP(M) No

¶29

1554 of 2024, delay in filing the appeal has been ordered to be condoned.

¶30

Appeal be registered.

¶31

Admit.

¶32

Mr. Arun Sehgal, learned counsel, appears and accepts service of notice on behalf of respondent.

¶33

Call for the records.

¶34

Respondent, through his counsel is directed to furnish the personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount, within four weeks, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, by giving solemn undertaking that he will surrender before this Court, in case of ultimate acceptance of the present appeal. The applicant shall not leave the country without the permission of the Court.

¶35

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶36

(subhash)

¶37

September 11, 2025

State of Hp v. Sahab Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Hp v. Sahab Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ved Vyas Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Raj Kumar Vs Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bani and Anr.

Ajay Soni Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Abdul Basit Vs State of Hp

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs Sanjeev Kumar

Akash Sagar @ Azad Vs the State of Hp and Others