SUDAM Vs. AMBADAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.

(2.) The petitioner first informant and also the victim within the meaning of Clause 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has preferred present petition for quashing and setting aside the order dated 01.02.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-17, Nagpur, dismissing the application for condonation of delay allegedly occurred in preferring an appeal against order of acquittal recorded by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur.

(3.) Considering the short controversy involved in the matter, it is wholly unnecessary to narrate the details except stating that upon the report lodged by first informant, Ajni Police Station registered the crime for offence under Section 447 of Indian Penal Code against respondent No. 1. After the investigation, the respondent No. 1 was charge sheeted by said Police Station for commission of such offence and was ultimately tried by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur. The said case ended into the acquittal of the respondent No. 1. The petitioner intended to prefer an appeal against the said judgment and order of acquittal dated 17.03.2010 in Summary Case No. 10/1990 by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur. However, under an erroneous impression that period of limitation for preferring such an appeal is prescribed under the law, he presented an application for condonation of delay occurred in preferring the said appeal. The said application was registered as Misc. Criminal Application No. 1873 of 2008. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-17, Nagpur dismissed said application for reason recorded in order dated 01.02.2012.