ARPITA GAUND MINOR CORPUS AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
SPLAD/734/2026 · 2026-10-06
Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15881 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15881 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 734 of 2026 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. This appeal is directed against order dated 26.03.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 293 of 2026, whereby the petition, filed by the appellant, has been dismissed.
2. The appeal is barred by 157 days.
3. An application, supported by affidavit, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay has been filed.
4. The ground taken in the affidavit for the delay in filing the appeal is that after dismissal of the writ petition, allegedly the health of the corpus deteriorated and when it came to the knowledge of the appellant that the corpus was on ventilator due to suffering from Hepatitis-B so as the corpus was not in a position to be produced before this Court, the special appeal was not filed and that the delay in filing the appeal is not deliberate and therefore, the same deserves to be allowed.
5. The ground sought to be raised seeking to explain the delay apparently is baseless inasmuch as no material in support of the said contention has been placed on record. Further, the appellant has failed to produce any action taken by him as to how on coming to know about the illness of the corpus, he has taken any steps for taking care of the corpus.
6. The reason indicated that as the corpus could not be produced during the said period, on account of illness, the appeal was not filed, apparently Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Amit Kumar Tiwari, Sweta Gaur Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Jagdish Pathak (S.C.) Arpita Gaund Minor Corpus and another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and 4 others .....Respondent(s)
has been set up only to be rejected as there is no requirement that the appeal can be filed only if the corpus is in a position to appear before the Court.
8. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to condone the delay in filing the appeal.
9. The application is, therefore, rejected. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed. October 7, 2026 M.Pal/AKShukla SPLAD No. 734 of 2026 2 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad