STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RATILAL LALJIBHAI TANDEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this matter, office has raised the objection that there is a delay of 18 days in filing an acquittal appeal by the State. We have carefully perused the delay condonation application and the grounds mentioned therein causing the said delay. From this, we are indeed quite satisfied that 'sufficient cause' is made out for condoning the delay in question.

(2.) . That takes us to yet one another important question, viz., whether before condoning the delay, it is always necessary to issue notice to the other side ? Now, in this regard in view of the decision rendered in the case of State of Gujarat v. Ramesh Laxman Chauhan, reported in 1994(2) GLR 1577, and thereafter yet another decision of this Court (Coram : K. J. Vaidya and M. H. Kadri, JJ.) rendered in Misc. Criminal Application No. 637 of 1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 605 of 1995, decided on 23-2-1996, which stands duly fortified by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of L. Naik Mahabir Singh v. Chief of Army Staff, reported in 1990 SCC (Cri.) 625, we do not deem it necessary to issue Rule to the respondent-accused, before condoning the delay. Accordingly, straightway we condone the delay and direct office to place the appeal, the same being Criminal Appeal No. 375 of 1995 on admission board immediately.

(3.) . Now, this matter indeed cannot be permitted to simply rest here only, merely by condoning the delay in question, as this Court has unfortunately consistent disturbing enough of experiences of delay in filing appeals, applications and revisions against the impugned judgments and/or orders on some such stock avoidable grounds, where we feel that if indeed the learned P.P.s/A.P.P.s in charge of the case are little efficient and mindful enough of their respective elementary duties, then in that case, not only they should not fail to immediately apply and obtain the certified copy of the impugned judgment and order in time, but should also surely further take reasonable care to see that irrespective of their proposals to challenge the impugned orders they immediately forward their opinion/proposal to the Secretary, Legal Department to take decision at his end, so that without any further loss of time the State can move expeditiously ahead for filing appeal. The anxiety of the Court is that if in a given case the accused have been wrongly acquitted, and they are involved in some serious offences like the one under N.D.P.S. Act, why should they be unnecessarily permitted to be at large for years together by the time matter comes up for admission and thereafter on the final hearing-board . Thus, with a view to immediately save the system suffering from its vulnerable relapsing negligence, quite avoidable, which has almost become a chronic disease undermining and crippling the overall interests of social justice, even in extremely serious cases of public importance and further more regarding which there do not appear to be any determined action much less any semblance of action so far taken against the concerned delinquents we, as the Constitutional functionary feel breathlessly constrained to find out some ways and means to combat and eradicate the evil of delay on the one hand unnecessarily delaying and dogging administration of justice frustrating cause of speedy justice, and on the other hand in turn every year adding dead-weight on the public exchequer, where people's money are unnecessarily wastefully squandered away by paying fees for the purpose in lacs to A.P.P.s appearing in such delay condonation applications.