Allowed

Abhiram Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC28 Oct 2021CRLA/113/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed an application for condonation of delay filed by the widow and legal heirs of a deceased appellant to continue a criminal appeal under S. 394 Cr.P.C., condoning a delay of over 12 years due to psychiatric illness and lack of knowledge.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay was allowed; the legal heirs are permitted to continue the appeal as appellants.

Abhiram Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No. 113 of 2010

Gurunath Lima

….

Appellant

Ms. A.K. Dei, Advocate

¶6

-Versus -

¶7

State of Orissa

¶8

…. Respondent Mr. M.S. Rizvi, Additional Standing Counsel (Vig.)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER_

¶11

30.11.2022

¶12

IA. No. 1423 of 2022

¶13

Order No.

¶14

¶15

This matter is taken up through virtual mode.

¶16

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing

¶17

the application under Section 394 of Cr.P.C. seeking leave to continue the appeal filed by the deceased convict. The present application is at the instance of the widow and other legal heirs of the deceased convict Gurunath Lima who had preferred Criminal Appeal No.113 of 2010 challenging the judgment of conviction dated 15.02.2010 passed by learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Jeypore. As per proviso to Sub-section 2 of Section 394, such an application can be moved within 30 days of the death of the original appellant. The original appellant is said to have died on 23.09.2010. As such, the present application ought to have been filed by 22.10.2010. The application has however been filed on 29.08.2022, i.e., after a gap of about 12 years. It is stated that the widow, who was a house wife was suffering from psychiatric illness and was under treatment from 10.05.2012. A medical certificate issued by the Medical

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

Officer C.H.C., K. Singhpur in the district of Rayagada has been enclosed to the petition, which reveals that the petitioner Subasini Lima was suffering from persistent Depressive Disorder, which is a psychiatric illness, from 10.05.2012 till date. It is further stated that the other legal heirs, namely, the sons of the appellant came to know about the impugned judgment and the appeal much later and thereafter handed over the death certificate and legal heir certificate to the advocate for filing the petition seeking leave. Some other grounds such as misplacement of the Vakalatnama etc. have also been taken. 3. Be that as it may, the basic ground urged in the petition is, the widow being under treatment and the other legal heirs being students are the relevant time, could not prefer the application in time.

¶20

Mr. M.S. Rizvi has objected to the prayer for condonation of delay by submitting that the grounds for condonation have been taken in a general manner without seeking to explain each day’s delay. Moreover, the grounds cannot be treated as sufficient to condone the delay.

¶21

I have considered the rival submissions, there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the medical certificate enclosed to the petition for condonation of delay, which shows that the widow of the original appellant was suffering from a mental ailment and is still under treatment. The other ground that the sons of the deceased appellant were students at the relevant time and hence, were not aware of the filling of the appeal or the law relating to permissibility of continuance of the appeal after death of the appellant appears quite plausible. Therefore,

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

notwithstanding the long period of delay, for ends of justice, this Court deems it proper to take a lenient view by condoning the delay, IA is therefore, allowed. The delay in filing the petition is condoned.

¶24

The I.A. is disposed of accordingly.

¶25

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶26

I.A. No. 1369 of 2022

¶27

Order No.

¶28

Heard.

¶29

¶30

Considering the submissions, this court is of the view that

¶31

the appellant being the legal heirs of the deceased appellant have a reasonable cause to continue with the appeal. The I.A. is allowed.

¶32

The legal heirs of the original appellant Gurunath Lima are permitted to continue the appeal in his case. They be substituted as the appellants accordingly.

¶33

Consolidated cause title be filed within a week.

¶34

Paper book be prepared by the Registry.

¶35

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶36

B.C. Tudu

¶37

Page 3 of 3

Abhiram Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhiram Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadananda Singh Vs State of Odisha

Dillip Makhal Vs State of Odisha

Dillip Kumar Rath Vs State of Odisha

Surjya@Surya Jena Vs State of Odisha

Sagar Kumar Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Pratap Naik Vs State of Odisha