The single judge allowed an application for condonation of 24 days delay in filing a criminal application seeking leave to appeal against a judgment of acquittal, finding the delay was not wilful or inordinate.
Delay of 24 days in filing the accompanying criminal application seeking leave to file appeal stands condoned.
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Office Notes,Office Memoranda of coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2127/2010 IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2126/2010
CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE 10TH AUGUST, 2010.
1.Heard Mr. S.D.Kaldate learned APP
for applicant and Mr. U.B. Bilolikar
learned counsel for respondent.
2.This is an application preferred
bytheapplicant-state,for
condonation of 24 days delay caused in
filingaccompanyingcriminal
application, seeking leave to file
appeal against the judgment and order
of acquittal dated 30.1.2010.
3.Learned Counsel for the respondent
opposed present application vehemently
and submitted that it bears no
substance, same is devoid of any
merits and therefore same be rejected.
4.For the reasons stated in the
application, it appears that applicant
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Office Notes,Office Memoranda of coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
has explained delay satisfactorily.
Moreover, it also appears that, said
delay is not wilful, deliberate and
intentional and certainly it is not
inordinate. Hence same deserves to be
condoned in the interest of justice.
5.In the result, present application
is allowed in terms of prayer clause
‘B’ there of and delay of 24 days
caused in filing accompanying criminal
application seeking leave to file
appeal stands condoned and present
applicationstandsdisposedof
accordingly.
(SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.)
Dt : 10.8.2010
aaa/2127.10
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Office Notes,Office Memoranda of coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2126/2010
CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE 10TH AUGUST, 2010.
1. Heard Mr. S.D.Kaldate learned APP for applicant and Mr. U.B. Bilolikar learned counsel for respondent.
2. Issue notice to the respondent.
3.Mr. Bilolikar accept notice for
respondent and seeks time to take
instructions.
4.Accordingly, by consent stand over
to 9th September, 2010.
(SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.)
Dt : 10.8.2010
aaa/2127.10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay for filing a criminal appeal seeking leave to appeal is warranted.
Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the application.
State
Respondent
Shrihari P. Davare
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court