HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 361 of 2014 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State/appellant and perused the record. 3. This government appeal has been filed with the prayer to allow the appeal and suitably enhance the sentence awarded to the accused respondent according to law. 4. A perusal of the judgement and order impugned herein dated 29.10.2012 goes to show that accused/respondent Mannu Yadav was convicted and sentenced for offence under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act for 03 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to 4 months further rigorous imprisonment. It was further directed that benefit of set off of period already undergone shall be extended to the accused. 5. As per office report dated 16.8.2014 till the said date no criminal appeal was got reported against Special Session Trial. This appeal has been filed by the State for enhancement of sentence as awarded by the trial court. This appeal is reported to be beyond time by 567 days. 6. Notice was issued to the accused/respondent vide order dated 20.8.2014. As per office report dated 10.12.2014 notice has been duly served on the accused/respondent- Mannu Yadav as reported by C.J.M., Kushi Nagar vide his report dated 20.11.2014. Despite service of notice no one appears on behalf of the accused/respondent. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : G.A. Counsel for Respondent(s) : State of U.P. .....Appellant(s) Mannu Yadav .....Respondent(s) 7. The delay condonation application under Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act along with affidavit has been filed with the prayer to condone the delay in filing of the present Government Appeal under Section 377 Cr.P.C. A perusal of the said affidavit and particularly paragraph nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the same, goes to show that proposal was sent by the government order dated 31.1.2013 stating that the appeal has to be filed against acquittal which was returned and then ultimately on 02.7.2014 notice was sent to the District Magistrate, Kushinagar as there was no response received from him after which the present appeal was filed. There is no explanation regarding inordinate delay in the administrative action. The same clearly shows the administrative lethargic in filing the present government appeal. 8. The law with regard to the same is trite. The explanation has to be tendered on day to day basis and mere vague and passing reference of events cannot be termed as explanation. The Apex Court in the case of Shivamma Vs. Karnataka Housing Board: 2025 INSC 1104 has held that administrative lethargy cannot be a ground for condonation of delay and in the present matter the same is evident. 9. In view of the same, the said application is dismissed and the matter be consigned to the records. 10. Office to communicate this order to the concerned trial court/District and Sessions Judge for information and necessary follow-up action. (Samit Gopal,J.) October 8, 2025 Naresh GOVAD No. 361 of 2014 2 Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad