MADHUSUDAN SITARAM VYAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the applicant - accused No.6 in Sessions Case No.16 of 2021 praying for condonation of 13 days delay in preferring the aforesaid Revision Application challenging framing of charge vide Exh.97 dtd. 24/5/2022.

(2.) Heard Mr.Dilip P. Joshi, learned advocate for the petitioner. According to his submission, drawing attention of the Court to page 89, which is charge framed against the accused shown in it vide Exh.97 dtd. 24/5/2022 submitted that since 'Non Bailable Warrant' was issued against the petitioner and he was not present before the Court, on that date, charge came to be framed against rest of the accused and his case was separated from them as per order passed below Exh.1. Though on 24/5/2022, he gave an application for recalling 'Non Bailable Warrant', according to his submission, it is still pending and yet not determined. As such, the petitioner-accused was not present on that day and therefore, according to his submission, charge was not framed against him. Pointing out from the certified copy of Rojkam dtd. 24/5/2022, it is submitted that 'Non Bailable Warrant' issued upon Respondent No.2 returned back unserved and learned advocate representing the accused No.6 i.e. present petitioner applied for recalling of 'Non Bailable Warrant', an order came to be passed below that.

(3.) However, it is not mentioned in it what order is passed. Mr.Joshi, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that application praying for recall of 'Non Bailable Warrant' was issued against the petitioner- accused No.6 is kept for hearing. From the said Rojkam, it is further pointed out that since the petitioner-accused No.6 is absent, below Exh.1, there was an order passed to proceed against the accused Nos.1,3,4 and 5, as case against Respondent No.2-accused abated as he died pending trial, and so far as case against petitioner- accused No.6 is concerned, it was ordered to be separated. It is further pointed out that pursuant to the charge framed against accused No.1,3, 4 and 5, plea came to be recorded pursuant to the said charge of those accused only.