Dismissed

Baijnath Mushhar v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC8 Jul 2019CR. APP (SJ)/904/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oddh edition of the High Court of Patna rejected the appellant's memo of appeal as time-barred. The court held that under Section 14(A)(3) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, condonation of delay is only permissible up to 180 days, rendering Section 5 of the Limitation Act inapplicable thereafter. Consequently, the appeal was rejected.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay (I.A. No.01/2019) was rejected, and the memo of appeal was dismissed.

Baijnath Mushhar Vs The State of Bihar… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.904 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-759 Year-2007 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

BAIJNATH MUSHHAR Son of Late Ramuna Mushhar Resident of VillageTribhawani, P.S.- Bhairoganj, District- West Champaran.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Bashishtha Pandey Son of Late Yugal Pandey

¶9

Bhola Pandey Son of Bashishtha Narain Pandey Respondent nos.2 and 3 residents of Village- Tribhawani, P.S.- Bhairoganj, District- West Champaran.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Usha Kumari 1, APP ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 08-07-2019

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as

¶15

learned APP.

¶16

This memo of appeal has been listed by the office over limitation. Needless to say this memo of appeal happens to be in accordance with Section 14(A)(1) of the SC/ST (POA) Act against the judgment of acquittal dated 24.04.2017.

¶17

As per Section 14(A)(3) of the SC/ST (POA) Act the High Court has been empowered to condone the delay during course of entertaining memo of appeal in between 90 days to 180 days after passing of the judgment impugned that too on being satisfied with the cause whereunder appellant has been

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.904 of 2019(4) dt.08-07-2019 2/2

¶19

prevented to file an appeal within 90 days. Furthermore, the said proviso also provides that no extension beyond the period of 180 days would be whereupon, there would not be applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

¶20

Consequent thereupon, the instant memo of appeal is found duly eclipsed on account of having been filed beyond the period of limitation. Accordingly, would not be entertained and so, I.A. No.01/2019 is rejected. Consequent thereupon, the memo of appeal is rejected.

¶21

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)

¶22

Prakash Narayan U T

Baijnath Mushhar v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baijnath Mushhar v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

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

Md. Rizwan @ Fakir Vs The State Of Bihar

Junaid Alam Vs The State Of Bihar

Jitan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Sajid Ansari and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar

Dinesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar