MAHINDRA @MAHESH MELABHAI CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- P M RAVAL
Holding
The delay was sufficiently explained and therefore condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Summary
The applicant, Mahindra @ Mahesh Melabhai Chauhan, filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing a revision application. The revision had been filed beyond the prescribed period, and the original complainant (respondent 2) was served notice and indicated he would file his vakalatnama. The court examined the memorandum of application and the explanation offered for the delay. It found that the reasons for the delay were sufficiently explained. Accordingly, the court held that the delay could be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The application was allowed and the rule of condonation was made absolute.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay in filing the revision application can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act?
Legislation cited
- Limitation Acts. 5
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/27389/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/01/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
27389 of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/51005/2025
==========================================================
MAHINDRA @MAHESH MELABHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. PARUL VANZARA(14228) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ROHAN SHAH APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 09/01/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act,
the applicant seeks condonation of delay caused in filing the
captioned revision application.
2. Pursuant to service of notice, learned advocate Jignesh
Lambha appears for the respondent 2 – original complainant.
He states that he will file his Vakalatnama before the registry
in due course. Registry to accept the same.
2.1 Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents
waive service.
3. 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
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/27389/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/01/2026
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)
MMP
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAHENDRA MOHANBHAI PUROHIT(HCD0074), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/01/2026
14:02:56
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.