R/CR.MA/10974/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 10974 of 2025 In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 20484 of 2025 With R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 11056 of 2025 In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 20486 of 2025 ========================================================== DHAVAL SURESHBHAI SONI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: AMBRISH V JANI(8674) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. BHAVNA D ACHARYA(6406) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR. H.K. PATEL ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA Date : 01/07/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 1.1 Rule. Learned APP waives service on behalf of the respondent State. 2. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted by the present applicant who is in judicial custody and the present application is preferred to condone the delay of 94 days in preferring Revision Application. Further it is submitted that the present applicant was not aware regarding the judgment passed in Criminal Appeal No. 275 of 2021 and in Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 2021. The judgment has been pronounced in his absence and further his advocate was also not informed about the present applicant regarding the R/CR.MA/10974/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 pronouncement of the judgment by the Sessions Court and when he had gone to the Court to enquire about another case, he was arrested and he was sent to the judicial custody on 30.4.2025. 3. Considering this there is a delay of 94 days which is required to be condoned. 4. On the other hand learned advocate Ms. Bhavna Acharya for the respondent No. 2 original complainant submitted that the respondent has also filed detailed objection and submitted that the delay has not been properly explained. The reason stated in the application is not genuine, hence the present application for delay requires to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the rival submissions of the learned advocate for the respective parties, the present applicant has been convicted by the learned trial court for the offence punishable under section 138 of the N.I Act and the same was challenged by preferring appeal before the Sessions Court, Surat and the Sessions Court, Surat, has also dismissed the Appeal and confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court. The present applicant is in judicial custody with the delay of 94 days, the reason stated in the application that he was not aware about the passing of the judgment by the Sessions Court in Appeal as the Appeal is dismissed. Hence, subsequently since he is in judicial custody he has preferred this application to condone the delay of 94 days. R/CR.MA/10974/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/07/2025 5. Considering the reasons stated in the application, there is a delay of 94 days. It is settled principle of law that when technicality and the substantial justice has been treated against each other then Court has to consider to prefer the substantial justice and as the present applicant is in judicial custody and hence, the reasons are stated to be genuine. Hence the delay is hereby condoned. Registry to the needful in this behalf. (L. S. PIRZADA, J) MARY VADAKKAN Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: MARY VINOD ANTHANATTE(HC00204), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/07/2025 15:16:46