High Court of Gujarat

MOHAMMED SAMIRBHAI HUSSAINBHAI CHUDGARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal: 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
Bench: P M RAVAL

Holding

The Court condoned the 145‑day delay and allowed the revision application.

Summary

The applicant, Mohammed Samirbhai Hussainbhai Chudgar, filed a criminal revision application 145 days after the prescribed period, seeking condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The respondent State of Gujarat did not appear, though notice was served, and the Additional Public Prosecutor waived service. The court examined the memorandum of application and found the explanation for the delay satisfactory. Accordingly, the court held that the delay could be condoned. The revision application was therefore allowed and the delay was condoned.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 145 days in filing a criminal revision application can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act

Legislation cited

Limitation Acts. 5

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation ActSection 5revision applicationcriminal procedureGujarat High Court

Judgment

     R/CR.MA/15747/2025                                ORDER DATED: 22/01/2026




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION
            OF DELAY) NO. 15747 of 2025
  In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/29561/2025

=================================================
   MOHAMMED SAMIRBHAI HUSSAINBHAI CHUDGAR
                         Versus
             STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHMEDSAIF HAKIM(5394) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                           Date : 22/01/2026

                           ORAL ORDER

1.      By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the
applicant seeks condonation of delay of 145 days caused in filing the
captioned revision application.


2.      Though notice is served, none appears for the respondent No.
2.


3.      Rule, returnable forthwith.             Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor waives service for the respondent – State.

                                  Page 1 of 2
        R/CR.MA/15747/2025                                                             ORDER DATED: 22/01/2026




  4.        Heard, the learned advocates for the respective parties present.


  5.        Having heard and considering the averments made in the
  memorandum of application, the Court is of the view that the delay
  that has occasioned in preferring the revision application has been
  sufficiently explained. The application, therefore, succeeds and is,
  accordingly, allowed. The delay caused in filing the revision
  application is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute accordingly.



                                                                                          [ P. M. Raval, J. ]
  hiren/7tss22126




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: HIREN VIRENDRABHAI MER(HC00351), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 22/01/2026 14:30:10



                                                        Page 2 of 2

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "condonation of delay"Sign in to search