Manish Singh @ Manish Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.533 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-768 Year-2018 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar ====================================================== Manish Singh @ Manish Kumar Singh S/O Tribhuwan singh Resident of - Gami Tola, Police Station - Town Police Station, District- Katihar ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Savita Devi W/O Late Harihar Mandal Resident of - Babu Tola Fasia, Police Station - Town Police Station, District- Katihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 09-04-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The present appeal has been preferred:
"for quashing the order dated 11.06.2019 passed by 1st Additional District and Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Katihar in G.R. Case No. 4464 of 2018 in Nagar P.S. Case No. 768 of 2018 registered under Sections 448, 420, 323, 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act against the petitioner, whereby and where under the learned Special Judge has taken cognizance against the appellant on 11.06.2019 under sections 406,420, 323, 427 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(1)(g) & (3) of the SC/ST Act and issued summons against him."
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.533 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2025 2/2
3. This appeal has been filed after delay of 1952 days inasmuch as the cognizance order is dated 11.06.2019 and the appeal came to be filed on 04.02.2025. The same has been filed without any petition (Limitation Petition) for condoning the extra ordinary delay in filing the appeal.
4. The office pointed it out on 29.01.2025. As the appellant chose to look the other way, the matter went to the Lawazima Board and the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) passed an order on 10.02.2025 to remove the defect as pointed out by the office.
5. The time was granted till 03.03.2025, still the Limitation Petition was not filed. One month later, the matter has come before this Court. Any appeal filed without Limitation Petition that too after delay of 1952 days needs to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly ordered. The Appeal stands dismissed. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T