Anandi Vinodbhai Vashi And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ANR
CRR-740-2025 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-11390-2025 in/and CRR-740-2025 Date of decision: 14.07.2025 Anandi Vinodbhai Vashi and anr.
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present:
Dr. Rau P. S. Girwar, Advocate, Mr. K. T. Rao, Advocate, and Ms. Archana Arora Rao, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma, Advocate, and Mrs. Saroj Kumari, Advocate, For respondent No.2.
****
, J. (Oral) CRM-11390-2025 This is an application for condoning the delay of 128 days in refiling the present criminal revision.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 128 days in refiling the present revision is condoned. Application stands disposed of.
Main Case 1.
The present revision petition has been filed under Section 442 BNSS, 2023, for setting aside or quash the order dated 17.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed being barred by period of limitation. ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.18 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRR-740-2025 (O&M) 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay of 40 days was on account of illness and the Court had observed that since the petitioner appeared through video conferencing for hearing the quantum of sentence, she was well aware of the passing of the impugned order and therefore, could not take the plea that she was unaware of the impugned order passed. Learned counsel further submits that the order dated 17.07.2024 is erroneous one.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand has stated that petitioner has placed on record the medical certificates and prescriptions showing that the petitioner was unwell and was unable to travel on the relevant dates. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and another Vs. Mst. Katiji and others, 1987(2) SCC 107 in support of his contention.
4.
In view of the submissions made hereinabove, sufficient ground to condone the delay is made out, therefore, the impugned order dated 17.07.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, is set aside and the petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned Court on 21.07.2025 at 10:00 am. The Court concern shall hear the matter within 15 days and decide the same. Rest of the pleas regarding amendment and additional evidence, the Court may consider on merits.
In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of accordingly.
( )
14.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.18 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document