Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

CBI, BSFB, MUMBAIversusSH BHARAT PRUSHOTTAM GAJJAR

Disposal
38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Holding

The delay was sufficiently explained and therefore condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

Summary

The CBI filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 75‑day delay in filing a restoration application for a main criminal revision that had been dismissed for default. The applicant argued that sufficient cause for the delay was shown. The court examined the memorandum and found the explanation satisfactory. Consequently, the court condoned the delay and allowed the restoration application. The order was made absolute without notice to the other respondents.

Issues considered

  • Whether a delay of 75 days in filing a restoration application for a criminal revision can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act

Legislation cited

Subjects

condonation of delayLimitation ActSection 5criminal revisionrestoration applicationHigh Court of Gujarat

Judgment

     R/CR.MA/26749/2025                           ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
                        26749 of 2025

                In F/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION/50803/2025
             In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/26888/2025

==========================================================
                            CBI, BSFB, MUMBAI
                                   Versus
                   SH BHARAT PRUSHOTTAM GAJJAR & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RC KODEKAR(1395) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                             Date : 13/02/2026

                              ORAL ORDER


1.      By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act,
the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 75 days caused in
preferring the restoration application in main Criminal Revision
Application which came to be dismissed for default for want of
prosecution, for non-removing the o&ce objection. As this is an
application for condonation of delay in restoration application,
no notice is issued to the respondent nos.1 & 2.


2.      Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of
Rule.


3.      Heard, the learned advocate for applicant. The learned
advocate for the applicant, drawing attention of the Court to



                                 Page 1 of 2
        R/CR.MA/26749/2025                                                             ORDER DATED: 13/02/2026




 the grounds for delay narrated in the application memo, states
 that su&cient cause has been made out for condonation of
 delay and accordingly, it is urged that the delay that has
 caused in preferring the restoration application in main
 Criminal Revision Application, may be condoned.


 4.         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 restoration
 application in main Criminal Revision Application has been
 su&ciently explained. The application, therefore, succeeds and
 is, accordingly, allowed. The delay caused in 0ling the
 restoration application in main Criminal Revision Application is
 hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute accordingly.




                                                                                                (P. M. RAVAL, J)
 AMIT ITALIAN
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/02/2026 17:13:42




                                                        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

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.