JIGNESHBHAI NANDALAL VITHALANIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The appeal is restored to its original status.
Summary
Jigneshbhai Nandalal Vithalani filed a criminal appeal which was dismissed by the Gujarat High Court on 16 January 2026 because he failed to appear on the second call and did not seek a pass‑over. The appellant subsequently filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking restoration of the dismissed appeal, explaining the reasons for his non‑appearance in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the application. The Court heard counsel for the applicant, examined the reasons offered, and found them sufficient to justify the failure to appear. Consequently, the Court allowed the restoration application and reinstated the appeal to its original status. The order was pronounced by Justice Sanjeev J. Thaker on 27 February 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal appeal dismissed for non‑appearance can be restored on the basis of reasons provided after dismissal
- Whether the reasons offered for non‑appearance constitute sufficient cause to set aside the dismissal
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/4351/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR RESTORATION) NO. 4351 of
2026
In R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION/5820/2023
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL/831/2023
==========================================================
JIGNESHBHAI NANDALAL VITHALANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ROHITKUMAR R SHARMA(12025) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 27/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed seeking restoration
of the captioned Criminal Appeal.
2. This Court by an order dated 16.01.2026 had
dismissed the captioned appeal in view of the fact
that none appeared in the second call when the
matter was called out nor any request for passover
was sought.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant stated the
reasons at para nos.3 and 4 of the application for
not remaining present.
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/4351/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2026
4. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and
having considered the application, sufficient reasons
have been mentioned in the application for not
remaining present when the matter was called out.
In view of the same, the present application is
allowed. The captioned matter is restored to its
original status.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
URIL RANA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RANA URIL K(HC01406), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/02/2026 16:20:08
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.