WGN CGURT 9F CE§§?T§SG§RH $35? EQLA$WjR §x§mmraa5 mimrkgé CQRgQM: FaiiELE $HRE RAéEEV GUFTA SJ. HGN?LE $H§1~3§ Swag?” E$§§§§R $§N§m§§§ é. ygmmaxi Aweai @Q $33.339i2w81 01M) 302W 0"“3 Panchavam Yadav, $/o Stwari @ l—ccvsecj {én Ja‘iE}. DamaEa ‘(ada‘vz ag$d abw: 62 veat‘g. Rm Chatan/‘han W; Mun§e€i Dis%% — %§%a3§ur (CG) 3% presem Cmngrajpara, PS Sarkarida, D€s€€ — §Hasaur WG} If‘ W£§f§i£$ Eemanc’gamg State cf ChhatEisgarh thrcugh PcHce Station Bor 1a Dim Kabkdham (CG) GrimEna AamaE um‘Ear $ecté€m 3m a? tine Si"%m%aa% gmawwa $mia Shri Pradeep Sman, counse; for the appeilant Shr§ Asmsh Sh5kta, Governmeni Advacate for %he State‘ ?regent : GREEK math AWL 2mg} The mi‘zowing ardgr 9f the Court wa$ passaed by Rggaev @ugizg, QJ. Apgei’lant Panchram Yadav has fiied this appeal en ‘§5.G2.2G€39 aaains? me imnugned jucggment dated 28.?22035 aaSSed by the Sessians Jucige, §<abe3rdham {Kawardhay in ST §\§o.22/26(35 The present apgea! 33 reper‘tedi to be time—barred bv as many as §G7Q days. 2') Agpeilant §anchram Y‘adav befme fmng this apgzeai thraugh Shri Pradaeg Singh. Advecate had $em anathe? appeaé fmm gaii aQamst the same impugned judgment @ated 28.12.2§GS, wwioh » N C Klai came te be registered as. Criminal Appea§ No.3§7l2036 and i3 gaming far hearing. 3') 1&8 more rhan grae appeai a’i the behest 9f the same appeilam againsi the same judgment of convictien and sentence is not maintainabre. ihe nresent appeal Le. Cr.A.(FR)No.869§2OOQ having been f§3ed rater ‘m mint o?" iime, is iiable to be dism§ssec§. 4‘: Tee eeeeai (Cr.A.(FR) No.86gl2009) therefore. rs diemreeeij with ’ihe ii‘eerty is iearneci ceuneei for zhe appeilam to represent aeeeiiant Panchram Yaaiav in Cr.ANo.39?/2006. #22),— eel» $ §3¥i§53@ 1 / \ Chief Justice 313%.? \ r \K r \ L sdl— \ emewmw \ 1 AO