Appeals against conviction and acquittal run on tight clocks. The Limitation Act, 1963 prescribes the periods — most relevantly, thirty days for an appeal to the Court of Session, sixty days to the High Court from a sentence, and ninety days for appeals against acquittal by the State under the older framework, with the appeal provisions of the BNSS now supplying the procedural frame. Convicts in custody, families arranging certified copies and fees, and government files moving through sanction ladders all miss dates. Section 5 of the Limitation Act permits condonation on sufficient cause — and criminal courts apply it with a distinctive tilt. This explainer covers the periods, the principles and the craft of a delay application that succeeds.
The periods that matter in Delhi practice
| Appeal | Forum | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Conviction by Magistrate | Court of Session | 30 days |
| Conviction by Sessions Court | High Court of Delhi | 60 days |
| Acquittal — State appeal / complainant with special leave | High Court | 90 days / as prescribed for the category |
| Victim\'s appeal | Appellate court under the BNSS victim-appeal provision | Per the applicable article and practice of the court |
| Revision | Sessions Court / High Court | 90 days |
Every computation begins with Section 12: the day of judgment is excluded, and the time requisite for obtaining the certified copy is excluded — provided the copy was applied for. An appellant who never applied for the copy loses the exclusion, which alone sinks many borderline appeals.
What counts as sufficient cause
Custody and communication
The convict lodged in jail, dependent on jail visits and legal aid for every step — the paradigmatic sufficient cause, especially where the jail appeal machinery itself moved slowly.
Indigence and legal aid
Time consumed in obtaining legal aid counsel, records and copies through DSLSA channels is regularly accepted when documented.
Illness and family circumstance
Genuine, documented incapacity of the appellant or the family member prosecuting the appeal — with medical records, not adjectives.
Counsel\'s default
Failure of previous counsel to file or inform, where the litigant acted diligently on discovery, is a recognised ground; courts distinguish the diligent client from the indifferent one.
The anatomy of a persuasive application
Weak applications share a form: two paragraphs, one adjective (“bona fide”), no dates. Strong applications share a different form: a table. Day-by-day or period-by-period, from the judgment to the filing: when the copy was applied for and received (with endorsements), when the family learned of the outcome, when legal aid was sought and granted, when the file reached counsel, what happened in each interval. Supporting documents — the copying agency endorsements, jail communication records, medical papers — are annexed against each period. The affidavit is sworn by the person with knowledge of each fact, not by a clerk reciting instructions. An application built this way converts condonation from mercy into entitlement: the cause is proved, not pleaded.
Opposing condonation: when and how
For respondents — the State opposing a late convict\'s appeal rarely profits, but complainants and victims opposing late acquittal-appeals or the State opposing stale revisions have real interests. The opposition that works is forensic, not rhetorical: take the application\'s own chronology and expose its gaps — the unexplained ninety days between copy and counsel, the copy never applied for, the earlier proceeding proving knowledge of the judgment. Argue prejudice concretely where it exists: witnesses relocated, the acquitted citizen\'s rebuilt life, evidence dissipated. And remember the asymmetry courts apply — the latitude extended to a prisoner is not a template for the State\'s file-notings, and submissions should hold each applicant to the standard the case law sets for that class of applicant.
- Apply for the certified copy the day of judgment — Section 12\'s exclusion is earned, not presumed.
- File appeal, condonation application and suspension/bail application as one set.
- Explain every interval with a document; unexplained gaps, not total length, kill applications.
- On discovery of previous counsel\'s default, act within days and say so on affidavit.
Practice note: Condonation restores the appeal, not the lost time\'s consequences — the sentence may have been running throughout. Where delay is anticipated (records in transit, sanction pending), consider filing within time with available documents and seeking leave to supplement, rather than perfecting a late appeal. A timely imperfect filing nearly always beats a perfect late one.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is delay condoned more readily in criminal appeals than civil?
Broadly yes, where the appellant is a convict. Courts repeatedly observe that liberty is at stake and that refusing condonation perpetuates a conviction unexamined on merits; delay caused by custody, indigence, or ignorance receives a liberal construction. The liberality is not unlimited — enormous unexplained delay still fails — but the tilt toward merits adjudication is real.
Does the State get the same latitude?
The State receives consideration for the realities of government decision-making, but courts have grown notably stricter with bureaucratic delay narrated in rote paragraphs about files moving between departments. State appeals against acquittal filed after long, poorly explained delay are dismissed on limitation with regularity — the citizen's acquittal hardens with time.
From when does limitation run, and what time is excluded?
From the date of the judgment or order appealed, with Section 12 of the Limitation Act excluding the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment — which is why the certified copy applied for promptly, with its endorsement of application and ready dates, is the first document of any appeal. Custody transit delays and legal aid processing are classic grounds for the remainder.
Should the appeal be argued with the condonation application?
The application is decided first, but courts frequently glance at merits: an appeal disclosing a serious arguable point supports sufficient cause elastic enough to reach it. File the memorandum of appeal, the condonation application with a day-by-day explanation, and the suspension of sentence/bail application together, so the court sees the whole picture at once.