IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMMO No.49 of 2004 Date of decision : July 6, 2009 Jindu Ram and others …Petitioners. Versus Pohlo Ram and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. None for respondent No.2. Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General, for respondent No.3. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Present petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the judgment, dated 30th April, 2004, passed in appeal, under Section 60 of the H.P. Panchayati Raj Act, whereby the appeal has been dismissed, only on the ground that it is barred by time. 2. Petitioner had been convicted by the Panchayat for misbehaving with the Panchayat members and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5/-. Appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate. Limitation prescribed for appeal, under Section 67 of the Panchayati Raj Act, is 30 days. Appeal was Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… barred by time. Learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that provisions of Limitation Act, particularly Section 5 of the said Act, did not apply and so the appeal was dismissed, being barred by time, without touching the merits. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 4. One of the reasons given by the learned Magistrate is that as per provision of Section 60(4) of the Panchayati Raj Act, Limitation Act does not apply. The view taken by the learned Magistrate is erroneous, on the face of it, because Section 60(4) of the Panchayati Raj Act speaks of the proceedings before the Panchayat. So, it is only in respect of the proceedings before the Panchayat that applicability of Limitation Act has been excluded. 5. Section 67 of the Act provides for appeal. Limitation is prescribed in this provision itself. However, the provision does not say that provisions of Limitation Act are not applicable to the appeals. Section 29 of the Limitation Act, inter alia, says that provisions of Sections 4 to 24 of the Act, shall be inapplicable to the proceedings, under any special or local law, only if such special or local law makes a provision, excluding the applicability of such provisions. Panchayati Raj Act does not exclude the applicability of provisions of Sections 4 to 24 or any of them, in respect of the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate. Hence, Section 5 of the Limitation Act is applicable. …3… 6. An application was filed under the said provision for condonation of delay. Trial Magistrate has wrongly held that Limitation Act, particularly provision of Section 5, is not applicable. 7. For the foregoing reasons, petition is allowed. Impugned order of the Judicial Magistrate is set aside and the case is remanded to the learned Judicial Magistrate, with a direction to decide the application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, afresh, on merits, according to law. 8. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate on 30th July, 2009. Petition stands disposed of. July 6, 2009(sd) (Surjit Singh), J.