DEEPAK NARAYANBHAI SUVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicants has prayed for condonation of delay of 349 days caused in preferring the revision application.

(2.) The learned advocate for the applicants submits that discharge application was moved to challenge the invocation of Sec. 307 IPC, which came to be rejected and on the very same day, Charge came to be framed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the accused. It is stated that some of the applicants were in jail when the Charge was framed and it was only after legal advice and managing the funds for the legal expenses, the applicants could propose to challenge the order of framing the Charge, which led to delay in filing the revision application.

(3.) In the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another v. Mst. Katiji and Others, AIR 1987 SC 1353 it has been observed as under: