MAHINDRA @ MAHESH MELABHAI CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE
- 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 revision application but delayed its filing. Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the applicant sought condonation of this delay. The respondent State of Gujarat was represented by Rohan Shah, while the original complainant’s counsel, Jignesh Lambha, appeared for the second respondent. The court examined the memorandum and found that the reasons for the delay were adequately explained. Consequently, the court condoned the delay and allowed the revision application. The order was signed by Justice P. M. Raval.
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/27437/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/01/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
27437 of 2025
In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/51006/2025
==========================================================
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/27437/2025 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
14:02:37
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.