Pooja Devi v. State of Hp and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC20 Jul 2026CRMPM/758/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; 136 days; appeal against acquittal; FIR No. 171 of 2019; Police Station Baijnath; Sections 376, 506 IPC; Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; Pooja Devi vs State of H.P.; Cr.M.P. (M) No. 758 of 2026; Cr.A. (A-DB)ST No. 3394 of 2026; merits reserved for appeal stage; next hearing 6 October 2026; Vivek Singh Thakur and Ranjan Sharma, JJ.; Himachal Pradesh.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 136 days in filing the appeal against acquittal of respondent No. 2 condoned; application allowed and disposed of; appeal to be registered as Cr.A. (A-DB)ST No. 3394 of 2026 and considered on 6 October, 2026. ¶¶13

Pooja Devi Vs State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Pooja Devi Vs. State of H.P. & Another

¶2

Cr.M.P. (M) No. 758 of 2026

¶3

20.7.2026

¶4

Present : Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant.

¶5

Mr. Gautam Sood, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.

¶6

Mr. Adarsh Kumar Vashisht and Mr.Shivom Vashisht, Advocates, for respondent No. 2.

¶7

Cr.M.P. (M) No. 758 of 2026

¶8

Present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 136 days in filing appeal against acquittal of respondent No. 2 in case FIR No. 171 of 2019, registered in Police Station Baijnath under Sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶9

It is case of the applicant that she was not associated in day to day hearing of the Trial and, therefore, she could not gather the information about acquittal of respondent No. 2 and when she gathered information, she immediately preferred present application alongwith appeal against acquittal of respondent No. 2 and, therefore, prayer for condoning the delay has been made.

¶10

Prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for respondent No. 2 on the ground that day to day delay, as

¶11

required to be explained under law, has not been explained and further that there is no merit in the appeal.

¶12

Merits and de-merits of the appeal shall be adjudicated at the time of adjudication of the appeal. So far as condonation of delay is concerned, we are of the opinion that a case is made out for condonation of delay. Accordingly, delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶13

The application is allowed and disposed of.

¶14

Cr. A. (A-DB) No. ……. of 2026 (Cr.A. (A-DB)ST No. 3394 of 2026

¶15

Be registered.

¶16

Respondents are duly represented.

¶17

Power of Attorney on behalf of respondent No. 2 be

¶18

filed during the course of the day.