High Court condoned 107-day delay in filing leave to appeal against acquittal, granted leave to appeal, and directed registry to register and list appeals for hearing.
Condonation of delay allowed; leave to appeal granted; appeals to be registered and listed for 25.11.2025.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Sr. No. 16
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Crl LP (D) No. 66/2023 c/w Crl LP (D) No. 43/2023
UT of J & K
.....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Dy. AG Mr. R.P. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Assisting counsel
v/s
Mohd. Azad
.....Respondent(s)
Through :- None
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
CrlM No. 1810/2023
10.10.2025
The appeal sought to be preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 27.04.2023 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Poonch [“the Trial Court”] is delayed by 107 days.
The respondent, despite notice and having appeared through learned
counsel has chosen not to file any objections.
We have gone through the application for condonation of delay and are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause is shown by the Union Territory of J & K for filing belated application for leave to appeal. The application for condonation of delay is, therefore, allowed and delay in filing application seeking leave to appeal is condoned.
Crl LP (D) No. 66/2023
On the analogy of order passed in the application for condonation
of delay and having gone through the judgment passed, the leave to file appeal is
granted and, accordingly, the application is disposed of.
2
Registry to register the appeal and list the same for consideration on
25.11.2025.
CrL LP (D) No. 43/2023
On the analogy of order passed in Crl LP (D) No. 66/2023, this application is also allowed and the applicant is permitted to file the appeal.
Registry to diarize the same and list the appeal along with the
appeal filed by the Union Territory of J & K.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Judge
JAMMU 10.10.2025 Manik
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 107 days in filing leave to appeal against acquittal should be condoned?
Whether leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal should be granted?
UT of J & K
Mohd. Azad
Sanjeev Kumar
Sanjay Parihar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
