The court condoned a 750-day delay in filing a criminal revision application, noting the delay was not deliberate and addressed. Consequently, the application was allowed and the complainant was ordered to pay costs to the accused.
Criminal application allowed; complainant to pay costs of Rs.500 to the accused within one month.
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
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1433/2009.
Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders.
CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.
DATE :29th September,2009.
1. Heard Mr.Suryawanshi for the applicant and Mr. RN Deshmukh for the respondent.
2. There is delay of 750 days in causing to
file Revision. Mr.Deshmukh has opposed
to entertain the application by filing
an affidavit of Mohammad Yusuf
Hasmullaha, the accused in the matter.
Mr. Deshmukh submits that there is no
justifiable ground to condone the delay.
3. It is a matter of record, there is
already a Revision preferred by the
present respondent against the order of
conviction being Criminal Revision
Application No.111/2007 filed on 16th
April, 2007. It follows that the
present applicant/original complainant
is aggrieved by the so-called inadequate
imposition of conviction. The matter
need to be addressed by the Court, even
ordinarily by hearing the complainant -
Ayyubkha. Consequently, the delay is not
2
deliberate, it is condoned. Criminal
Application is allowed in above terms.
The complainant to pay costs of Rs.500/-
to the accused within a month.
( K.U.CHANDIWAL )
JUDGE
bdv/cran1433.09
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 750 days in filing a criminal revision application should be condoned.
Whether the application is maintainable when a previous revision was preferred by the respondent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ayyubkha
Mohammad Yusuf Hasmullaha
K.U.CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court