Munish Kumar Vs State of Hp

Munish Kumar Vs. State of HP

Cr.MP(M) No.762 of 2025

21.05.2025 Present: Mr. Sagar Chhabra, Advocate, for the applicantappellant.

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms.Sharmila Patial, Mr.Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents/State.

¶5

Cr.MP(M) No.762 of 2025

¶6

By medium of this application, the applicantappellant has sought condonation of one year, two months and fifteen days’ delay that has crept-up in filing of the appeal.

¶7

It has been averred in the application that after the arrest of the applicant-appellant and till now, his family’s economic condition has gone bad to worse as there is no source of income. It has further been averred that even though the applicant-appellant was in judicial custody since 30.12.2023, however, he was not able to contact his family members or engage any counsel and when he could contact his family members, it took considerable time to collect the documents of the case and immediately thereafter the instant appeal was filed. 3. Even though, the instant application is vehemently opposed by the State, however, we find that the applicantappellant has been convicted and indisputably a statutory right for filing appeal is conferred upon him to assail the conviction and it is more than settled that right of appeal from a judgment of conviction affecting the liberty of a person keeping in view the expansive definition of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is

¶8

-2-

¶9

also a fundamental right. In coming to such conclusion, we are duly supported by a recent judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahesh Singh Banzara Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, SLP (Crl.) No.18045/2024, decided on 02.01.2025, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed in para-6 as

¶10

under:-

¶11

“6. In Dilip S. Dahanukar v. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd., (2007) 6 SCC 528, this Court observed that an appeal is indisputably a statutory right and an offender who has been convicted is entitled to avail the right of appeal which is provided for under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Right of Appeal from a judgment of conviction affecting the liberty of a person keeping in view the expansive definition of Article 21 is also a Fundamental Right. It was also observed in Rajendra v. State of Rajasthan, (1982) 3 SCC 382 (2), that where the appellant furnishes reasons for delay in filing an appeal, the court would not dismiss the appeal as timebarred without examining the reasons for the delay. Hence, in light of the above, it is evident that the right to appeal, particularly when it concerns the liberty of an individual, is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court's order dismissing the appeal solely due to delay, without properly examining the reasons for the delay, therefore, warrants reconsideration. Hence, there is a necessity of examining the reasons for delay in filing an appeal since the dismissal of the appeal based on mere technicalities, without a substantive assessment of the appellant's reasons, was erroneous.”

¶12