Kaushalaya Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.518 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2015 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Kaushalaya Devi, Wife of Late Ajay Kumar Yadav, Resident of VillageBhawanipur Zirat, Ward No 21, P.S.- Chhatauni, District- East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Appellant
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Rajan Sahni Son of Ram Raj Sahani, Resident of Village- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Turkauliya, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari 3.
Sudama Sahni, Son of Lalbabu Sahani, R/O Village- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Turkauliya, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari 4.
Chandan Rai @ Chandan Sahni, Son of Bharat Ram, R/O VillageRaghunathpur, P.S.- Turkauliya, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari 5.
Krishna Yadav, Son of Nagendra Yadav, R/O Village- Dhawahi, P.S.- Harshidhi, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari 6.
Ravi Sahni @ Ravi Kumar Sahni, Son of Bharat Sahani, R/O VillageChintamanpur, P.S.- Pipra, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Bipin Kumar, Addl PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) 16-12-2024 I.A. No. 1 of 2024 This interlocutory application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 5 years 6 months in filing of the present appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 26.07.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No. 192 of 2016 arising out of Chattauni P.S. Case No. 69 of 2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, East Champaran at Motihari.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.518 of 2024(4) dt.16-12-2024 2/3
2. As per the stamp reporter, the limitation expired on 24.10.2018 whereas the present appeal has been presented on 23.04.2024.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant did not know about the limitation period for filing of the instant appeal. She is a 'pardanashi' woman and was in shock and agony due to murder of her husband. She has two children and she had to look after their well being and education The appellant was also in financial crisis.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as soon as the appellant got proper legal advice, she filed the instant appeal.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed this application. It is submitted that the delay is huge and the appellant is unable to show sufficient, much less cogent reason for condonation of delay. It is submitted that the plea taken by the appellant that she did not know the limitation period and was in shock and mental agony which delayed the filing of the appeal are not cogent reasons which may inspire the confidence to explain the huge delay of over 5 years 6 months. It is submitted that accepting such plea to condone the delay may create bad precedent.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.518 of 2024(4) dt.16-12-2024 3/3
6. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant has produced before this Court a copy of the judgment dated 28.08.2024 passed by a learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 409 of 2024 (Kaushalya Devi Vs. The State of Bihar and Others). By this judgment, the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court has refused to entertain an appeal filed by the informant against the judgment of acquittal of the other co-accused who faced a separate trial.
7. We have carefully gone through the pleadings available in the interlocutory application of this case. In our opinion, the reasons shown are not cogent reasons and cannot be accepted to condone a delay of 5 years 6 months in filing of the present appeal.
8. The I.A. No. 1 of 2024 stands dismissed.
9. As a result of dismissal of the I.A., the appeal itself stands dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) ( Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lekhi/- U