Section 5 Limitation Act applies to special leave applications absent clear exclusion, allowing delay to be condoned for sufficient cause.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act applied to an application for special leave to appeal under Section 417(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure because Section 417 did not expressly exclude the Limitation Act and was not a self-contained code on limitation or exclusion of time. The Court held that exclusion under Section 29(2) must be by clear words, not implication, and that the new Limitation Act therefore governed the special-law limitation period. On the uncontroverted affidavit, sufficient cause for the delay was shown, so the delay in filing the special leave application was rightly condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applied to an application for special leave to appeal under Section 417(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and whether the delay in filing the application could be condoned.

Analysis: The Court held that the provisions of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act governed special laws and that the phrase "expressly excluded" meant exclusion by clear words, not by implication. Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure merely prescribed a limitation period for special leave applications and did not constitute a self-contained code governing limitation, computation of time, or exclusion of time. On the materials before it, the Court found that the new Limitation Act made Section 5 applicable for determining limitation under a special law, and that the uncontroverted affidavit disclosed sufficient cause for delay.

Conclusion: Section 5 of the Limitation Act was applicable, the preliminary objection failed, and the delay in filing the special leave application was rightly condoned in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: A special law is not excluded from the operation of Section 5 of the Limitation Act unless such exclusion is expressed in clear words, and where the special law is not a self-contained code on limitation, delay may be condoned on sufficient cause being shown.

---