This court dismissed a criminal writ petition challenging the rejection of an application for condonation of delay filed by a businessman in response to an order granting process under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The writ petition was dismissed summarily.
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
mpt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 824 OF 2009
Ratneshwar Babu Jha ... Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr.Janardhan Jha for the petitioner
Ms.A.T.Jhaveri APP for the State.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J.
DATED : 24th November 2009
P.C.
2
condonation of delay. The application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. That order is impugned in this writ petition.
(the number of days of delay is kept blank in the original application itself)
It is to be noted that the only reason to be given for condonation of delay is that he is a businessman and was busy in his day-to-day affairs and therefore could not file the revision within time. In my view, this is no ground for condonation of delay that too when the delay is not
3
small but of several months. The learned Sessions Judge, has also held that the revision application was filed only for the purpose of delaying the trial before the Magistrate. This finding is not challenged before me.
(D.G. KARNIK,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's claim of being a busy businessman constitutes sufficient cause for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether a writ petition ought to be allowed to interfere with the Sessions Judge's finding that the revision application was filed to delay the trial.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Basantlal H. Ahuja Vs. State of MaharashtraDistinguished¶22
Basantlal H. Ahuja Vs. State of Maharashtra 2007(2) BCR 425
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ratneshwar Babu Jha
State of Maharashtra
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
