Disposed¶9

H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited v. Raj Kumar

Himachal Pradesh HC16 Mar 2026CRMPM/2913/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; Section 5 Limitation Act; criminal appeal barred by limitation; delay neither intentional nor willful; circumstances beyond control of applicant; leave to appeal granted; CRMPST/10661/25; appeal admitted; bailable warrants Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in like amount; Arresting Police Officer; record called for; H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited v. Raj Kumar; Cr.MP(M) No. 2913 of 2025; Sandeep Sharma, Judge; decision dated 16.3.2026.

What did the court decide?

Delay in maintaining the accompanying Criminal Appeal condoned; leave to appeal granted (CRMPST/10661/25); Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 directed to be registered and admitted; bailable warrants of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount ordered against the respondent; record called for. ¶9

H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited Vs Raj Kumar — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay in maintaining the accompanying Criminal Appeal, which is barred by limitation, should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. +2 more

¶6

Court's answer

The Court was convinced and satisfied that the delay in maintaining the accompanying appeal was neither intentional nor willful, having occurred on account of circumstances completely beyond the control of the applicant.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

The delay having been sufficiently explained, it was condoned and the limitation application was disposed of.

¶7

Key takeaways

Leave to appeal was granted in Cr.MP(M) No. of 2026 (CRMPST/10661/25) and that application stands disposed of.ratio¶9
Upon admission of the appeal, bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount were ordered to be issued against the respondent, undertaking to appear as and when directed and to receive any sentence imposed on conclusion of the appeal; the record was also called for.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 16.3.2026 in Cr.MP(M) No. 2913 of 2025 - H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited v. Raj Kumar (Sandeep Sharma, Judge): The applicant's application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in maintaining the accompanying Criminal Appeal, which was barred by limitation, was decided ex parte, no reply having been filed despite opportunity. The Court found the delay neither intentional nor willful but occasioned by circumstances completely beyond the applicant's control, held it sufficiently explained, condoned it, and disposed of the application. In the connected Cr.MP(M) No. of 2026 (CRMPST/10661/25), leave to appeal was granted and the application stood disposed of. Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 (number blank in text) was directed to be registered and admitted. Bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount were ordered to be issued against the respondent, undertaking to appear in Court as and when directed and to receive any sentence imposed on conclusion of the appeal; the record was called for.

H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited v. Raj Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.P. State Cooperative Bank Limited v. Raj Kumar

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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Hp

Dharmender Kumar Vs State of Hp

Jai Pal Vs Lekh Raj Rajta

Raj Kumar Vs Dheeraj

Ramesh Vs the H.P. State Co-Operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Ltd.

Pardeep Kumar Vs State of Hp