Patna High Court
Krishna Dev YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The 213‑day delay cannot be condoned; the application for condonation is dismissed.
Summary
The appellant, Krishna Dev Yadav, filed a criminal appeal under section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to set aside an acquittal dated 19‑02‑2024. He applied for condonation of a 213‑day delay in filing the appeal, alleging illness and financial constraints as reasons. The court noted that no medical evidence was provided to substantiate the claim of illness and found the explanation vague and unsupported. Considering the appellant’s position as a well‑educated Circle Secretary of a political party, the court held that the delay could not be justified. Consequently, the application for condonation was dismissed, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal itself.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 213 days in filing a criminal appeal under section 413 can be condoned without medical or other substantive evidence.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- criminal appeal
- section 413
- procedural law
- appeal dismissal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.152 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-1993 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Krishna Dev Yadav, Son of Late Basant Yadav, Resident of Village- Sijua,
Bagdaha, PS- Bodhgaya, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jai Singh Son of Late Murli Singh Resident of Village- Dahariya Bigha,
P.S.- Bodh Gaya, Distt.- Gaya
3. Birendra Kumar Singh, Son of Shri Krishna Singh R/O- Village- Aajan, P.S.-
Madanpur, Distt.- Aurangabad
4. Deo Sharan Das, Son of Late Hari Das, Resident of Village- Keshopur, P.S.-
Telhara, Distt.- Nalanda
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
4 09-02-2026 I.A. No. 01 of 2025
This is an application seeking condonation of 213
days in filing the present appeal.
2. This appeal has been preferred under section 413 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for setting aside
the judgment of acquittal dated 19.02.2024 passed by the court
of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Gaya, in S. Tr. No.
136/2001 arising out of Protest Complaint Case No. 762/1993.
3. The only reason shown for the delay of 213 days is
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.152 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
stated in paragraph 5 of the application which is reproduced as
under for ready reference :-
“That thereafter the appellant return
back to his village and he became ill and when
he recovered from illness on 15-01-2025
thereafter he managed money for meet the
expenses in the filing the present appeal and
after managing of money on 18-01-2025 came to
Patna and contacted to a counsel of this Hon'ble
court and handed over the entire documents to
file the present Appeal. The learned counsel of
the appellant after drafting the case the same
has been filed on 20-01-2025 before this Hon'ble
court.”
4. We have noticed that in support of the statements
made in paragraph 5 of the application, the appellant has not
enclosed even a chit of paper showing that he was under
medical advice and was unable to move.
5. On the other hand, we have found from the records
that the appellant happened to be the Circle Secretary of the
Communist Party of India, Bodh Gaya, and is said to be a well
educated person. The reason shown in paragraph 5 of the
application is a statement written in general manner which
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.152 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
would not inspire confidence of the court unless it is duly
supported by the doctor’s prescription or the medical certificates
showing that the appellant was either hospitalized or was not in
a position to file the application. So such delay of 213 days can
not be condoned on any aspect.
6. I.A. No. 01 of 2025 is dismissed.
7. As a result of the dismissal of the application (I.A.
No. 01 of 2025), the appeal itself stands dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Shailendra Singh, J)
Annu/BKS-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.