1 2026:CGHC:13509 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No.2279 of 2025 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Station House Officer, Police Station Gurur, District Balod C.G. ... Appellant versus Bhaiyya Ram Sinha S/o Late Bahoran Sinha, Aged About 54 Years Ward No.03, Nagar Panchayat, Gurur, Police Station Gurur, District Balod C.G. ... Respondent For Appellant/State :Shri Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General. For Respondent :Shri Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 20.03.2026 1. Heard on I.A.No.01/2025, an application for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal. 2. This Criminal Appeal has been filed with a delay of 346 days. SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.03.23 11:04:27 +0530 2 The prayer made in the present Appeal reveals that the State/Appellant seeks to set aside the impugned order dated 06.08.2024 passed in Special Criminal Case No. Bail/231/2024 by the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Balod, whereby bail has been granted to the accused/Respondent for the offences mentioned therein. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that the delay in filing the present Appeal has occurred on account of completion of departmental formalities and the functioning of the Government machinery. It is further submitted that the said delay is bona fide and not intentional. 4. The Appellant/State hast failed to provide sufficient reasons for the long delay, treating the plea of "bona fide". To condone such a long delay, the Appellant must show "sufficient cause" that prevented them from filing the Appeal within the prescribed time. Simply stating the delay was "bona fide" or "not intentional" is often insufficient if the Appellant was negligent or did not act with due diligence. 5. In a 2024 case, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary, (2024 INSC 932), the Supreme Court dismissed an Appeal due to an excessive delay stating that the State failed to provide adequate justification and that such a delay made a mockery of justice. The said dictum of Supreme Court further 3 unequivocally establishes that the judiciary will maintain a strict stance on the condonation of delays, irrespective of the Petitioner being a State authority. 6. In view of the above legal position, this Court is not inclined to condone the huge delay of 346 days merely on the ground of completion of departmental formalities and the functioning of the Government machinery, which is shown to be bona fide or unintentional. 7. Accordingly, I.A.No.01/2025 is rejected. Consequently, this Appeal also stands dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Priya