STATE Vs. ATUL KUMAR CHANDUBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Gujarat has filed this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 24 days in preferring Criminal Appeal No. 579 of 2005 challenging the order of acquittal passed by learned JMFC, Chotaudepur in Criminal Case No. 209 of 1991 whereby the accused no. 3 and 4 were acquitted of the commission of offence under section 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act while convicted original accused no. 1 and 2, against which they have preferred criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2004 before lower appellate court and they have been acquitted by th appellate court judgment and order dated 23/12/2005.

(2.) THIS Court issued Rule on 16/11/2006. In response to the rule, respondents entered their appearance through advocate Shri. Nirav Thakkar. Shri. Thakkar has pointed out that respondent no. 1 and 2 have wrongly been joined in the present appeal as though they were convicted by the trial court, subsequently have been acquitted by the Sessions Court (appellate court)which is impugned in the present appeal. Shri. Thakkar has brought to the notice of this Court that the order of conviction of the trial court in respect of accused no. 1 and 2 has been quashed and set aside by the Sessions Court (appellate court) in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2004 and both the accused have been acquitted by quashing and setting aside the order impugned in this appeal on merits. The present respondent no. 3 and 4 were originally acquitted by the trial court itself for want of any evidence showing that they were partners in the accused no. 2 firm. It deserves to be noted that this Court has made elaborate observations while upholding the order of acquittal in respect of original accused no. 1 and 2 in Criminal Appeal No. 485 of 2006 and therefore no elaborate discussions on merits is called for in the present appeal. As it is stated herein above both, the application and appeal are being heard and disposed of together by this common judgment and order.

(3.) SHRI. Patel has made submission in respect of delay caused in preferring the impugned appeal, which is not objected by Shri. Thakkar. Hence, considering the submissions and averments mad in the application, same deserves to be granted. Accordingly Cri. Misc. Application No. 12987 of 2005 is allowed. Delay caused in preferring Criminal Appeal No. 579 of 2005 is condoned. Rule is made absolute.