Varikoppula Rajam and Another vs State and Another

Heard.

Aggrieved by the orders dated 14-5-97 passed in Cr.M.P.No.827/97 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, in dismissing the application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal, the present petition was filed.

Admittedly the trial Court convicted the petitioners for the offence under Sections 395 and 397 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of eight years and imposed a fine of Rs.500/- each and the petitioners were taken into custody and they are in jail now. Subsequently they seemed to have preferred an appeal against (he judgment and conviction given by the Court below with a petition to condone the delay of 249 days in preferring the appeal.

It is stated that the case bundle was handed over to the wife of the 1st petitioner for preferring an appeal. But she seemed to have been attacked with jaundice and lungs disease and hence she could not prefer appeal in time. The Court below disbelieving the version given by the appellants dismissed the application for condonation of delay. Under the provisions of Cr.P.C. the accused who is convicted for an offence is entitled to prefer an appeal as a matter of fact and in fact it is a substantial right vested in the accused to question the correctness or otherwise of the judgment of the Court below. For various reasons they may not be able to file an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation and on the ground that the accused preferred an appeal beyond the period of limitation, if the appeal is dismissed at the threshold the accused will be losing his right to question (he veracity of the judgment and thereby he will be subjected to irreparable loss and injury. In this case (he Sessions Judge simply dismissed the application for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal by stating that the reasons given in the affidavit are not sufficient to condone (he delay. This is nothing but non application of the mind on (he part of the officer concerned. Hence the order of the appellate Court in refusing to condone delay in filing the appeal is set aside and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Consequently, the Sessions Judge is directed to take the appeal on file and dispose of the same as early as possible on merits and in accordance with law.

In the result, the petition is allowed.