Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

HANIF KHAN versus COMMISSIONER & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Hanif Khan v. Commissioner & Others - WRIT - C No. 8819 of 1986 [2007] RD-AH 2609 (19 February 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

(Court No.28)

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.8819 of  1986

Hanif Khan   vs.  Commissioner, Jhansi division, Jhansi and others

Hon.S.U.Khan,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition is directed against order dated 29.5.1986 passed by Commissioner, Jhansi division Jhansi dismissing petitioner's appeal being appeal no.17 of 1980-81 under Section 18 Arms Act as barred by time.  The appeal was filed on 12.5.1981 against order of the Additional District Magistrate (Finance), Banda dated 4.3.1981 through which arms license of the petitioner had been cancelled.  Petitioner stated that in connection with a crime case he remained in jail from 17.3.1981 to 18.4.1981 and he came to know about the order challenged in appeal on 22.4.981.

It appears that appellant had also filed some review petition before Additional District Magistrate in which it was stated that petitioner was ill.  In the said review petition it was not stated that petitioner was in jail from 17.3.1981 to 18.4.1981. No counter affidavit was filed to the delay condonation application before the appellate court.  Merely because petitioner did not state before the Additional District Magistrate that he was in jail from 17.3.1981 to 18.4.1981, it could not be said that he was infact not in jail.  Whether a person was in jail or not could very well be ascertained by the State authorities and brought on record before the appellate court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the criminal case against the petitioner due to which petitioner was sent to jail and his license was cancelled was decided on 23.8.1984 and petitioner was acquitted.    

In my opinion appellate court took a very strict view of the matter.  In delay condonation matter such a strict view is not warranted vide Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag vs. katiji A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 1353.

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed.  Impugned order is set aside.  Delay in filing appeal before Commissioner is condoned on payment of Rs.1,000/- as cost which shall be deposited before the Commissioner within three months.  After deposit of the cost appeal shall be decided on merit.

19.2.2007

RS/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.