Allowed

Kishan Bajirao Haral v. the State of Mah Thr. Jintoor P.S.

Bombay HC3 Aug 2011APPLN/2768/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench allowed the Criminal Application for condonation of delay. The court accepted the explanation provided by the applicant for the significant delay in filing the criminal appeal against conviction and sentence.

What did the court decide?

Condoned delay of 1056 days and directed registration of the accompanying Criminal Appeal.

Kishan Bajirao Haral Vs the State of Mah Thr… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

(1)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Criminal Application No. 2768 of 2011 (In Criminal Appeal Stamp No. 324/2011)

¶4

Kishan s/o. Bajirao Haral, Age : 43 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. Nilaj, Taluka : Jintoor, District : Parbhani.

¶5

.. Applicant.

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Jintoor, Taluka : Jintoor, District : Parbhani. .. Respondent.

¶8

Mr. A.N. Irpatgire, Advocate, holding for Mr. V.M. Maney, Advocate, for the applicant.

¶9

Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent.

¶10

CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.

¶11

DATE : 3RD AUGUST 2011

¶12

(2)

¶13

COURT'S ORDER :

¶14

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶15

Issue notice to the respondent.

¶16

Learned APP Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar accepts notice for the respondent.

¶17

This is an application preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 1056 days caused in filing accompanying Criminal Appeal against the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-1, Parbhani, in Sessions Trial No. 23/2008, dated 8th May 2008.

¶18

For the reasons stated in the application, it appears that the applicant has explained the delay satisfactorily. Moreover, the applicant has filed accompanying Criminal Appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon him, by way of judgment and order dated 8th May 2008, and his right to appeal cannot be taken away only because of delay in preferring the appeal, and therefore, present application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.

¶19

(3)

¶20

In the result, present Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" thereof, and delay of 1056 days caused in filing accompanying Criminal Appeal stands condoned, and said appeal be registered and numbered, and present Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶21

( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE )

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

bgp/ka2768

Kishan Bajirao Haral v. the State of Mah Thr. Jintoor P.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Bajirao Haral v. the State of Mah Thr. Jintoor P.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devidas Ragho Koli Vs the State of Mahrashtra

Gurunanak Fruit Company Savada Vs Kuber Sunatu Patil and Ors.

Gurunanak Fruit Company Savada through Proprietor Vs Kuber Sunatu Patil and Ors.

The State of Mah Thr. Pp Vs Chandrakant Bhagwan Pande

Radhakisan Waman Patol Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rajendra Ambersing Jadhav Vs the State of Mah Thr. Pp