LIMITATION
ACT, 1908
(IX
OF 1908)
Section—5
Condonation of delay
A criminal
appeal was filed after it was barred by 735 days. Poverty and helplessness of
the appellant and absence of any adult male member in the family for preferring
the appeal earlier were considered mitigating circumstances and compassionate
grounds for condonation of the delay.
Shamsul Huq Vs. The
State, 15BLD (HCD)276
Section-—5
Condonation of Delay
Condonation
of delay in filing an appeal is the discretion of the appellate Court but such
discretion must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily. The hot haste in
which the learned Sessions Judge condoned the delay without hearing the State
and the complainant cannot be approved as being opposed to the principle of
natural justice.
Minhaz A. Chowdhury Vs.
Manzurul Huq and another, 16BLD(HCD)155
Section—5
High Court Division’s
satisfaction regarding the ground for delay
When the
High Court Division is satisfied with the grounds for considering the delay in
filing the appeal, there is nothing for the Appellants Division to interfere
with the discretion.
Nurul Haque Vs. The
State, 13BLD(AD) 199
Section—5
The prayer
for condonation of the delay caused in filing the appeal is required to be
allowed so as to enable the appellant-peitioner to get a chance of getting the
appeal heard and disposed of on merit according to law.
Mahirun Nessa Vs. The
State, 13BLD (HCD)170
Section—5
In a case
where limitation has not been specifically prescribed and trial is held in
absentia, the pronouncement by the superior Courts, particularly by the Supreme
Court, is that nobody can be made to suffer any harm to his rights including
those relating to property, person and reputation, without giving him an
opportunity of being heard.
Md. Siddique V. The
State, 13BLD (HCD)579
Ref: 39DLR(1987)164;
42DLR15; P.L.D 1970 (Lahore)—Cited