R/CR.MA/17326/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 17326 of 2026 In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION/29675/2026 ========================================================== AJAYSINH POONAMSINH RATHOD Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR. SACHIN S. SINDHAV(14625) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. AARTI R. MISTRY(18822) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 05/08/2026 ORAL ORDER Learned advocate Mr. Parth Chauhan submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and seeks permission to file his appearance. Registry to accept the same. 1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. Learned advocate Mr. Parth Chauhan waives service of rule for the respondent nos. 2 and 3. 2. Heard finally with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/17326/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2026 3. The present application seeks condonation of delay of 261 days in preferring the accompanying Criminal Revision Application challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court, Vadodara. 4. Both the learned advocates jointly submit that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and hence, the delay of 261 days may be condoned and the main matter may be taken on board. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. 6. The law relating to condonation of delay is no longer res integra. In Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that a liberal approach should ordinarily be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice. The Court observed that refusal to condone delay may result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the threshold and cause of justice being defeated. Page 2 of 4 R/CR.MA/17326/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2026 7. In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Supreme Court has observed that the length of delay is not material; what is material is the acceptability of the explanation. It was further held that unless mala fides or gross negligence are imputable to the party seeking condonation, the Court should lean in favour of deciding matters on merits. 8. The Supreme Court has also reiterated in several subsequent decisions that while “sufficient cause” must be established, the expression should receive a pragmatic and justice-oriented interpretation where refusal to condone delay would result in denial of a statutory remedy and where no serious prejudice is demonstrated by the opposite side. 9. In the present case, the delay is of 261 days. The explanation furnished by the applicant cannot be said to be lacking in bona fides. There is nothing on record to indicate that the delay was deliberate, intentional or actuated by any ulterior motive. Equally, no irreparable prejudice is shown to be caused to the respondent if the delay is condoned. On R/CR.MA/17326/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/08/2026 the contrary, refusal to condone the delay would result in the applicant being deprived of an opportunity to challenge the impugned judgment on merits in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. 10. Having regard to the nature of the proceedings, the explanation tendered by the applicant and the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 11. The delay of 261 days in filing the Criminal Revision Application is condoned. 12. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid term. (S. V. PINTO,J) VASIM S. SAIYED Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 05/08/2026 18:11:19