SALMABANU MUSTAQBHAI MANSURI AND D/O HANIFBHAI MANSURIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- GITA GOPI
Holding
The Court held that the two‑day delay was sufficiently explained and therefore condoned.
Summary
The petitioners, Salmabanu Mustaqbai Mansuri and others, filed a criminal revision application but delayed filing it by two days. They sought condonation of this delay, explaining that the mother had to care for minor children and the family was experiencing financial difficulties, which prevented timely engagement of counsel. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, argued that the explanation was insufficient and the application should be rejected. The Court examined the explanations provided and found them satisfactory, concluding that the brief delay did not prejudice the proceedings. Consequently, the Court condoned the two‑day delay and allowed the revision application to proceed.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of two days in filing a criminal revision application can be condoned on the basis of the petitioner's explanation
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/9145/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
9145 of 2026
In
F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/13664/2026
================================================================
SALMABANU MUSTAQBHAI MANSURI AND D/O HANIFBHAI MANSURI &
ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
JIGNESHKUMAR P PANDAV(8297) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR ROHAN H RAVAL, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/04/2026
ORDER
1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties.
2. By way of this application, the applicants have prayed for
condonation of delay of 2 days occurred in preferring the
application.
3. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the
applicant No.1-mother had to take of the minor children.
In addition, the family was facing a 昀椀nancial crunch and
hence, the applicant No.1 could not approach an
advocate to take the legal recourse in time and all these
factors have contributed to the above delay.
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/9145/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent–
State submits that the delay in 昀椀ling the application is not
su昀케ciently explained and therefore, the present
application may be rejected.
5. Considering the averments made in the application and
as the delay is su昀케ciently explained, the delay of 2 days
occurred in 昀椀ling the application deserves to be
condoned and is hereby condoned.
6. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
7. Let the Criminal Revision Application be listed in due
course.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212), Principal pvt Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 21/04/2026 17:09:52
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.