A.Madesh v. P. Arjunan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-02-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR in Crl.M.P.SR.No.58161 of 2022 in CRL A NO. 636 OF 2022 A.Madesh S/o.Appavugounder, No.235, Bharathi Nagar, Idayapatti Post Thumbal Via, Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk, Salem District.
Petitioner(s) Vs P. Arjunan S/o.Perumal, Governor Thoppu, Manjini Village And Post, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District.
Respondent(s) CRL A No. 636 of 2022
1. A.Madesh S/o.Appavugounder, No.235, Bharathi Nagar, Idayapatti Post Thumbal Via, Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk, Salem District.
Appellant(s) Vs
1. P.Arjunan, S/o.Perumal, Governor Thoppu, 1/4
Manjini Village And Post, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying to condone the delay of 459 days in representing the restoration petition in Crl.M.P.S.R.No.58161 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.636 of 2022.
For Petitioner :
Mr.A.Rajakumar For Respondent :
Mr.K.Elumalai
ORDER
The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 459 days in representing the restoration petition in Crl.M.P.SR.No.58161 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.636 of 2022.
2.The learned counsel for petitioner/appellant submitted that the delay has caused due to mixup of the bundle in the office, when the office was re-arranged. For that reason, though the restoration petition was filed earlier, the delay occurred to re-present the the restoration petition. 3.The learned counsel for respondent strongly opposed the petitioner's contention stating that the trial Court acquitted the respondent and the appellant/complainant not diligent in follow up the appeal. 2/4
4.It is seen that the mistake committed in the Advocate office. Despite, opposition, it is only a delay in re-presentation. Hence, this Court is inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay stands condoned and the petition is ordered.
26-02-2026 rsi 3/4
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
rsi in Crl.M.P.SR.No.58161 of 2022 in CRL A NO. 636 OF 2022 26.02.2026 4/4