Patna High CourtCR. REV./119/2022dismissed

Ram Chandra Sah @ Chandra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-22Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.119 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2527 Year-2015 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ram Chandra Sah @ Chandra Sah S/o Late Devki Sah R/o village- Vishunpur Matiarwa, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Awadh Kumar Shrivastava Anchal Adhikari/Circle Officer, AnchalPaharpur, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran 3.

Mukesh Giri Rajaswa Karamchari, Anchal- Paharpur, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran 4.

Mukti Sharan Pandey Bada Babu (Head Clerk), Anchal Office- Paharpur, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar No.III, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025 I.A. No. 01 of 2025 The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for condonation of delay of 1037 days in filing of the present criminal revision petition.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to ignorance of law with regard to period of limitation and paucity of fund, the petitioner could not approach this Court within time.

4. From perusal of record, I find the same petitioner

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.119 of 2022(7) dt.22-09-2025 2/2 moved before the learned Sessions Court against the order of learned trial court directing the complainant-petitioner to produce sanction order and the revision before the learned Sessions Court was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. So the petitioner is not so ignorant of law as he wants the Court to believe. Another submission made on behalf of petitioner is that due to intervention of Covid period, the criminal revision could not be filed earlier. This submission is not sustainable as the limitation expired on 16th of April, 2019 and the Covid struck in the country in March, 2020. For almost 11 months, the petitioner sat tight on the matter and did not file criminal revision petition against the order impugned. I am of the opinion that the reasons offered by the petitioner for condonation of delay are not sufficient and therefore, the limitation petition is dismissed.

Cr. Revision No. 119 of 2022

5. Consequently, the present criminal revision petition also stands dismissed.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T