MOHMAD JAHANGIR PATHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. K. V. Shelat the learned A.P.P. appears and waives service of rule. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties. 1.1 Petitioner-Mohmad Jahangir Pathan, who came to be tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No. 26 of 1989 for the alleged offence punishable under Sec. 20(b) (ii) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, was at the end of trial by judgment and order dated 29-12-1992 was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lac, and in default, to undergo further R.I. for six months. By this Misc. Criminal Application, petitioner has moved this Court inter alia praying for condoning the delay of 324 days in filing the appeal before this Court.

(2.) Miss Kachhavah, the learned Advocate holding free-brief for the poor petitioner submitted that petitioner, at present, is an old man aged about 67 years. Not only that but after he came to be lodged in Jail, he has become totally handicapped as a result of paralysis attack. He is neither able to stand nor walk nor make any movement of his own unless physically lifted. According to Miss Kachhavah because of extreme poverty, handicapped condition and lack of knowledge about the period of limitation, the petitioner has not been able to file the present appeal in time, which has resulted into delay of 324 days. She under the circumstances submitted that mercy be shown to the petitioner and in the interest of justice delay in filing appeal be condoned and matter be decided on merits according to law.

(3.) On perusing the trial Court record, it appears that at the relevant time, when the petitioner made application Exh. 5 dated 8-12-1992 to the learned trial Judge, praying for giving him free legal aid to defend his case, he was an old man aged 65 years. This application was granted by the learned Judge vide his order dated 9-12-1992 by appointing Mr. R. I. Patel, the learned Advocate. Further, on seeing the petitioner personally, he is found to be handicapped, unable to make any movement of his own. These three circumstances on face of it are eloquent enough to show that the petitioner is a poor, old and handicapped person.