IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA G. APP. (DB) No.42 of 2008 THE STATE OF BIHAR Versus JAMUNA GOSWAMI & ANR ----------- 5 22.01.2009 I.A. No. 2278 of 2008 is a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act wherein prayer has been made for condoning the delay of 8 months 7 days in filing of this Government appeal which is against the judgment dated 30th November 2007 of the Addl. Sessions Judge-IX, Patna passed in S.T.No. 1511 of 2005 whereby the respondent Jamuna Goswami and Satendra Kumar who were respectively tried for the charges under Sections 366 and Section 366 as well as 376 I.P.C. have been acquitted of the charges, because the learned trial Judge, on the grounds as detailed in his judgment, found the charges not proved. The Office report mentions that the limitation for filing the appeal expired on 7th March 2008 but the appeal was filed on 14th November 2008 and, thus, there was delay of 8 months and 7 days. The statutory period of 90 days for filing the appeal was already available to the appellant, but it was not filed within the period and thereafter with a delay of 8 months and 7 days this appeal has been filed. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents who have opposed the prayer for condoning the delay. As also required under the Rules, a copy of the judgment passed in a criminal trial is sent to the District Magistrate by the trial court for information. It is pointed out to us that the trials are - 2 - conducted by Public Prosecutors before the trial court who are also aware of the proceedings before the court as well as the orders and judgments passed in the cases in which they conduct the proceedings. It is not at all explained what was done or what steps were taken by the appellant for filing an appeal within the statutory period of 90 days. The only ground as taken in the aforesaid limitation petition is that on 29th April 2008 the Deputy Director of Government of India, Bureau of Civil Aviation security, Janpath Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi sent Letter No.A-19012/9/2005/1 Admn. to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna regarding the aforesaid judgment and that thereafter, the Additional Secretary sent letters to the Superintendent of Police, concerned Public Prosecutor for verification and that thereafter on their recommendation for filing appeal, this Government appeal has been filed. The learned A.P.P. has submitted that the aforesaid letter to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar was received for getting information whether any appeal had been filed in the case or not and that after receiving of the letter the matter was processed with the Government machinery and then this appeal has been filed. There is no explanation for the statutory period of 90 days why this Government appeal was not filed during that period. Even on the admitted position, as per the appellant the letter to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar was received on 29th April 2008, but after receipt of that letter also, things did not move with requisite expedition and after a delay of nearly 8 month and 7 days this appeal - 3 - was filed and there is no specific explanation as to why this delay was caused and how many days were taken on which point of transaction in the Office of the Government of Bihar. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer for condonation of the delay and it is submitted that there has been grave laches and the matter has been dealt with without any effort to expedite the matter. Thus hearing we find that there has been grave laches in the filing of this appeal and there is no reasonable explanation in this case. In such view of the matters, we do not feel inclined to condone the delay and thus, prayer for it is refused. As a consequence of the rejection of the prayer for condoning the delay, this appeal will also stand dismissed as time barred. Jay/ (C.M.Prasad,J) (V.N.Sinha,)