The High Court · 2025

5. The Stats of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, through P.S. Madhapur ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. P. Rana Kamalasan Counsel for the Respondent No. 5 : Mr. M. Ramachandra Reddy Additional Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TEL! NGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTTCE JUWADT ! RtpEVt CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.959 of 2Cj 9 16 DECEMBER 2025 Behareen: lVlohammed Khan Sami Ullah Khan Pe t tioner Syed Asif and four others AND Res 5 ondents :ORDER: Challenging the order, dated 13.08.2025 passed in Crl.M P No 3T of 2025 in Criminal Appeal S.R.No.3t' of 2025 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy _ istrict at L.B. Nagar, the petitioner filed this Criminal Revision Case

2. Heard [\,4r. P.Rana Kamalasan, learned cori rsel for the petitioner and [\4r. [i/.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Acc itional public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.S-State )erused the record.

3. Case of the petitioner is that he has lodged ,t complaint against respondent Nos.1 to 4-accused Nos.1 to 4. Eirsing on the said complaint, the Police have registered a case in Cr.i ne No..1004 o't 2024 for the offences punishable under Section 11S (1) r/w. 3(S) of BNS, 2023 and taken up investigation. After cc mpletion of 2 investigation, charge sheet was filed against respondent Nos.1 to 4-accused Nos.'l to 4 before the Court of ll Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally (for short 'trial Court'), the same was taken cognizance and numbered as C.C.No.311'1 o'f 2024 for the aforesaid offence. Despite the petitioner being the vtctim, without issuing any notice to him, by judgment, daled 14.12.2024, the learned Magistrate convicted respondent Nos.'l to 4-accused Nos.1 to 4 for the lessor offence and imposed a fine of Rs.2,5001 each for the offence under Section 122 of BNS, 2023 Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a Criminal Appeal along with Crl.M.P No.37 of 2025 under Section 5 of the lndian Limitation Act, 1963 seeking to condone the delay of nine days in preferring the Appeal. However, the learned Sessions Judge, by order dated 13.08.2025, dismissed the application filed for delay condonation on the ground that the reason stated by the petitioner for the delay'in preferring Appeal that he had no knowledge about the case proceedings cannot be accepted. Aggrieved further, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not aware of the filing of the charge sheet by the lnvestigating Officer and the trial Court has disposed of the matter J / -_4 3 on 14.12.2024 without issuing any notice to him. Orr knowing the i same on 14.12.2024, the petitioner immediately applie I for certified copy of the jucigment, however, the same *Ls supp i 'd to him on 2201 2025 l-lence, the period belween the date cl filing of the copy application, and the date, on which, the copres were made ready, is liable to be excluded, while computing I e period of limitation. The present appeal was filed on 09.() 1.2025, and therefore, there was a delay of only nine days in pr :senting the Appeal, which was neither intentional nor deliberate f he learned Sessions Judge failed to properly consider the reason put forth by the petitioner for the delay and mechanically dir missed the \ application filed for condonation of delay. Hence, r: prayed to allow the revision by setting aside the impugned rrder, dated { { 13 08 2025.

5. Considering the submissions made by the lear ted counsel for the petitioner explaining the cause for the dela,r in filing the Criminal Appeal and in the interest of justice, this C: _r rt deems it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the petitioi:r to contest the matter.

6. ln view of the above, the impugned or( er, dated 13 08.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.37 of 202b in Criniral Appeal 4 S.R.No.377 of 2025 by the learned principal Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy, District at L.B. Nagar, is hereby set aside and the delay of nine days in filing the Criminal Appeal is condoned. The Office of the Court of Principal Sessions Juflge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, is directed to number the Criminal Appeal forthwith, so as to enable the learned Sessions Judge to proceed with the matter

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed \ \ To, SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUry REGIslAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER t. The Principal Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L B Nagar' Z. tio CCs to the public Prosecutor, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings' at Hyderabad (OUT)

3. One CC to Mr. P. Rana Kamalasan, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies D a .-41 I I : HIGH COURT JS, J DATED:1611212025 ORDER CRLRC.No.959 of 2025 : =:--::={_ : iiE ST,1's-r::' .:\ /.,. .,. /._. J l,,:l -\. I + .r' o 0Ei; i[25 * I rparcrltc: " a:ua,r-- '' ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE I