TELU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Virendra Saran.

(2.) LEARNED counsel has contended that the period of limitation of the appeal filed by him on 10th February, 1978 which the High Court Office reported to be beyond time by 43 days is actually not beyond time. By order of this Court dated 10-2-78 office was directed to report whether a jail appeal has been presented by the appellant, Telu. The office has reported that the jail appeal of Telu was received on 19-2-78 and is beyond time by 24 days. The jail appeal of Telu which is on a printed form was thumb marked by Telu on 3-2-78 and on the back of this appeal it is mentioned that the copy of the judgment was applied for on 5-12-77 and it was received on 19-1-78 and the appeal was presented on 3-2-78 which was forwarded with the endorsement of the Superintendent, Jail, Muzaffarnagar under his signature dated 4- 2-78. This appeal from jail was received in this Court on 19-2-78. The time spent in obtaining the certified copy by the prisoner was thus 46 days which has to be deducted from the total period from the date of the judgment to the date of the presentation of the appeal. The date of the judgment is 31st October 1977 and the appellant Telu presented his thumb marked appeal on 3-2-78 and handed it to the jail authorities for onward transmission. Therefore, 3-2-78 would be deemed to be the date of formal presentation of the appeal by the prisoner Telu and thereafter the jail authorities took their own time to forward the same to this Court and the appeal was received here on 19-2-78. So the appeal would be deemed to have been presented by prisoner Telu after 95 days of the date of the Judgment. From these 95 days, the period of 46 days spent in obtaining the certified copy is to be excluded and on this calculation the appeal of the prisoner Telu would be deemed to have been presented in this Court on the 49th day of the total period of limitation of 60 days and would, therefore, be well within time. The represented appeal filed by Sri Virendra Saran on the 10th February 1978 would also be well within the period of limitation i.e. having been filed within 56 days of the total period of limitation of 60 days. Appellant Telu having been confined to jail was not at liberty to personally collect the certified copy of the judgment and to present his appeal in this Court. Accordingly both the appeals, namely the jail appeal as well as the represented Cr. Appeal No. 395 of 1978 have been filed within the period of limitation.