Arunabha Basa, J. - (1.) The application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter called the Act) is filed by the petitioners in connection with the appeal for condonation of delay of 114 days, in preferring the criminal appeal against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Court below.
(2.) Petitioners were facing trial in connection with case being S.T. No. 8(6) [05 S.C. No. 3(2) 05]. The trial was heard and decided by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 1st Court, Baruipur and by judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 10.4.2008. Petitioners herein were found guilty to the charge under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and after conviction they were sentenced to suffer S.I. for three years each and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each in default to suffer S.I. for one year each. As already observed the aforesaid order of conviction and sentence, was passed by learned Court below on 10.4.2008.
(3.) In the application filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act, petitioners took the following grounds: 1. That one Muhari Babu, who was conducting the case of the petitioners before the learned Court below, did not advice them to file an appeal before the High Court. 2. The petitioners are illiterate village people, having no idea about the next step to be taken after they were granted bail by the learned Court below. 3. In the month of September, 2008, one local lawyer came to know from the appellants that no appeal was filed before the High Court. In the mean time the said lawyer took the petitioners to one practising lawyer of the High Court, who advised them to contact learned Advocate Sri Pinaki Bhattacharyya, a practising Advocate of this Court. 4. Learned Advocate Sri Pinaki Bhattacharyya advised the appellants to collect all the papers including copy of the judgment from the Muhari Babu, who conducted their case before the learned Court below. 5. Thereafter, the Muhari Babu after taking money, supplied all the papers to the appellants. 6. The petitioners thereafter, contacted learned Advocate Sri Pinaki Bhattacharyya, who advised them to file an appeal before this Court. 7. The petitioners submit that there was no intentional latches on their part and they were ignorant about the procedure to be adopted and also due to act done by the said Muhari Babu, there is delay of 114 days in preferring appeal before this Court.;