The Court condoned a 60-day delay in filing a criminal appeal. Simultaneously, the primary petition was dismissed as withdrawn by counsel, with liberty to approach the Sessions Court for condonation of delay.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn; Application for condonation of appeal delay stood disposed of.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-A No. 834-MA of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.10.2010
Chhaju Ram
...Appellant
versus
Smt. Meenakshi Sharma
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Sunil Saharan, Advocate for Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the appellant.
M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral)
Crl. Misc. No. 35798 of 2010
Heard.
There is a delay of 60 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by affidavit, the delay of 60 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned under the present set of circumstances.
The crl. misc. application stands disposed of accordingly.
CRM-A No. 834-MA of 2010
After arguing for some time, learned counsel intends to withdraw the present petition to enable the appellant to avail his appropriate remedy before the Court of Sessions Judge along with an application for condonation of delay.
October 14, 2010 naresh.k
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone a 60-day delay in filing an appeal under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Whether to dismiss a petition when the appellant intends to withdraw it to pursue remedies before the Sessions Court.
Chhaju Ram
Smt. Meenakshi Sharma
Mehender Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
