Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1021 (GUJ)

State of Gujarat v. Sampatraj Pirchand Jain

2023-08-17

J.C.DOSHI

body2023
JUDGMENT : J.C. DOSHI, J. 1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Asmita Patel for the petitioner State and learned advocate Mr. Rajesh Kanani for the respondent. 2. Learned APP places on record report of the concerned investigating officer, which has recorded the statement of parties to the dispute. Said report is taken on record. 3. The deed of compromise between the parties to the dispute i.e. petitioner original complainant and the respondent accused are placed through learned advocate Mr. Rajesh Kanani, which is placed on record. 4. Both the parties i.e. complainant and the accused are present before this Court and they have jointly submitted that they have settled their quarrel amicably out of the Court and now, they have no dispute regarding the allegations made. 5. The petition challenges order passed below Exh.1 in Criminal Misc. Application No. 4676 of 2015, whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad City rejected the application filed by the State seeking condonation of delay of 111 days caused in preferring appeal against the order passed below Criminal Misc. Application No. 105 of 2015 discharging accused Mr. Sampatraj Jain. 6. Having heard both the sides, this Court is of the considered opinion that reason given by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge for not condoning the delay is not in consonance with the underlying principle governing issue of condonation of delay. 7. It is trite law that while considering the application for condonation of delay, the Court is required to adopt pragmatic approach and allow the party to proceed further on the merits of the case. In view of that the Court in ordinary consideration would have allowed this petition and condone the delay and permit the State to prefer appeal. However, during the passage of time, since the parties have compromised their dispute amicably out of the Court, now allowing the State to relegate to the Sessions Court for pursuing the Criminal Misc. Application for condonation of delay would be a futile exercise and may be abortive process. 8. This Court has taken into consideration the deed of compromise executed between the parties and the report placed by the concerned investigating officer and since the parties have amicably settled their dispute, now nothing is required to be proceeded further. Thus, this is a fit case to close the proceedings, as the parties have put their dispute to rest. 9. This Court has taken into consideration the deed of compromise executed between the parties and the report placed by the concerned investigating officer and since the parties have amicably settled their dispute, now nothing is required to be proceeded further. Thus, this is a fit case to close the proceedings, as the parties have put their dispute to rest. 9. With this observation and direction, present petition stands disposed of as not survived. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith. 10. It is made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and it shall not be treated as precedent in any other case.