THE STATE vs KHADIM HUSSAIN
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the State against a judgment of the High Court, which had acquitted the respondent of charges under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petition was filed with a delay of 114 days. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the non-availability of government funds, necessitating a request for allocation, constitutes a sufficient ground for the condonation of delay in filing a petition. The Supreme Court held that the reasons provided for the delay were legally insufficient. Consequently, the Court rejected the application for condonation of delay and, as a result, dismissed the main petition as time-barred. The judgment reinforces the principle that administrative or financial difficulties, such as the unavailability of funds or the bureaucratic process of seeking government allocation, do not automatically satisfy the legal requirements for condoning a delay in judicial proceedings, and parties must exercise due diligence in adhering to statutory limitation periods.
- Does the non-availability of government funds constitute a sufficient ground for the condonation of delay in filing a petition for leave to appeal?
- Can a petition be dismissed solely on the ground of being barred by time when the application for condonation of delay is rejected?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---This petition is directed against the judgment dated 19-7-2001 passed by the High Court, whereby on acceptance of appeal filed by the respondent his conviction under section 302, P.P.C. Has been set aside aL3 he has been acquitted.
2. This petition is barred by 114 days. In the application given for condonation of delay the only ground urged is that of non-availability of funds due to which the amount in question could not be deposited in time as the case was sent to Government for allocation of funds which are still awaited.
3. We are afraid if this could be held as a sufficient ground for condonation of delay under the law.
4. For the foregoing reasons the application seeking condonation of delay is hereby rejected.
Resultantly, the main petition is also dismissed as barred by time and .