The High Court of Bombay at Bombay, in criminal appeal No.1127 of 2006, condensed a delay of 446 days in filing the appeal and disposed of the present condonation application. The appeal was admitted.
Condonation of delay of 446 days in filing the criminal appeal allowed; criminal appeal admitted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1182 OF 2006
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1127 OF 2006
Guljarsingh @ Rinku Mahendrasingh
Kodivari : Appellant.
versus
The State of Maharashtra : Respondent.
Smt.A.N.Pathan, advocate appointed, for the
appellant.
Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP, for the State.
CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE
SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.
DATED : JUNE 11, 2007.
P.C.
1. This is an application for condonation of
delay of 446 days filed by the accused through
jail . The appeal is filed by the accused
2
through jail. We have appointed an advocate from
the Legal Aid Panel to represent this accused.
Heard the advocate for the accused and APP.
Application for condonation of delay is allowed.
Delay is condoned. Application is disposed of.
2. Appeal is admitted.
[SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J] [D.G.DESHPANDE,J]
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 446 days in filing the criminal appeal can be condoned.
Whether the criminal appeal admitted herein can be disposed of by a single judge.
Whether to appoint a Legal Aid Advocate for the appellant serving jail time.
Guljarsingh @ Rinku Mahendrasingh Kodivari
The State of Maharashtra
D.G.DESHPANDE
Smt.NISHITA MHATRE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court