Court rejects man's plea filed 300 days after framing charge

13 Sep 2017

A Delhi court has rejected a man's plea for condoning a 300-day delay by him in filing an appeal in a 2016 sexual harassment case, saying he could not take the law for granted. The court sternly said the accused was making a "bald plea" after he gave his mother's illness as a reason for the delay in challenging the charge, as he did not give any detail about her health.

"The limitation for filing criminal revision can be extended, provided sufficient grounds are shown justifying the delay in filing the revision petition. "In the present case, the applicant has stated that on account of illness of his mother, he could not prefer the revision petition. This application was devoid of any detail about the illness of the mother of the applicant. Thus, only a bald plea has been taken without showing any genuine ground for the delay in filing the revision petition," additional sessions judge A K Kuhar said. The judge said: "One cannot take the law for granted and approach the court at once own convenience."

The court said the Limitation Act only bars a right to avail the remedy and the courts do not go into technicalities to deprive a person from exercising his right under the law. "But even the procedural law cannot be taken for granted otherwise the provisions become otiose," it said. Dismissing his revision petition, the court noted that as per the trial court record the man appeared before in court on almost all dates of hearing. "Therefore, the illness of mother is not found to be justified ground for condonation of delay which is more than 300 days in this case," it said. The man had approached the court on April 4 with an application for condonation of delay and revision plea challenging an order framing sexual harassment charge against him in January 2016.