2025:JHHC:32937 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.832 of 2025 …. Satyendra Kumar Chauhan @ Satendra Chouhan, age about 37 years, son of late Shitnath Sah, resident of Village-Akashi, P.O.- Akashi, P.S.-Bhandra, District-Lohardaga ……Appellant Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Lalita Devi @ Lalaita Oraon, Wfie of Late Suidhir Chouhan, resident of Akashi, P.O.-Akashi, P.S.-Bhandara, District- Lohardaga ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, APP …… Order No.02/08th October 2025 I.A. No.12939 of 2025 I.A. No.12939 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the appellant for condoning the delay of 665 days in filing this instant Criminal Appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he has earlier filed Cr.M.P. No.2582 of 2023 by challenging the order taking cognizance dated 28.07.2023. However, the same was withdrawn on 14.08.2025 with liberty to file this Criminal Appeal before this Court and hence the delay of 665 days in filing this Criminal Appeal may be condoned. 3. Learned APP has raised objection and submitted that proper explanation has not been given. 4. It appears from the records and pleadings made by the learned counsel for the appellant that earlier he had filed Criminal Appeal (SJ) 918 of 2022 for grant of Anticipatory Bail which was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Subash Chand as then 2025:JHHC:32937 2 His Lordship was) of this Court on 03.08.2023. 5. It further appears that the appellant has filed Cr.M.P. No.2582 of 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 28.07.2023. But the prayer was dismissed as withdrawn on 14.08.2025 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary) of this Court with the liberty to file an appeal. Thereafter, the instant appeal has been filed. 6. Therefore, it is evident that the delay of 665 days has not been sufficiently explained by the learned counsel for the appellant. 7. Thus, this Court is not satisfied with the explanation of delay of 665 days furnished in I.A. No.12939 of 2025. 8. Accordingly, I.A. No.12939 of 2025 is hereby rejected. 9. This Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.832 of 2025 is also dismissed. 10. The appellant is also directed to surrender before the learned Court below and move for regular bail. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated 08.10.2025 Nishant/-