Disposed

Mirza Himayat Baig @ Ahmed Baig Inayat Mirza @ Hasan v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC14 Aug 2013APPA/1156/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal application, the Bombay High Court granted eight weeks of time to the appellant's counsel to prepare an appeal. The court noted that it was the first time the grievance regarding missing paper books was raised, despite multiple adjournments previously sought.

What did the court decide?

The learned counsel for the accused was granted time up to 26th August, 2013, to prepare the appeal.

Mirza Himayat Baig @ Ahmed Baig Inayat Mirza @… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

APPA1156_2013

¶2

vidya

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1156 OF 2013 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 755 OF 2013

¶6

Mirza Himayat Inayat Baig @ Ahmed Baig Inayat Mirza @ Hasan

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

vs.

¶9

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent

¶10

Mr. Mehmood Pracha a/w. Mr. Pathan T.W and Mr. I.A. Khan i/b. Legal Axis, Advocate for appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 755 of 2013. Mr. Raja Thakare, Special P.P. a/w. Mrs. V.R. Bhonsale, APP for the State/applicant.

¶11

CORAM: MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

¶12

AUGUST 14 , 2013.

¶13

P.C.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Special P.P. for the State.

¶15

Two prayers are made in this application. One of the prayers is that

¶16

atleast 8 weeks time be granted to the counsel to prepare the present appeal. As far as this prayer is concerned, it is seen that the appeal of the accused was admitted on 17^th July, 2013. As Confirmation Case No. 4 of 2013 was tagged along with Criminal Appeal No. 755 of 2013 filed by the

¶17

accused, it was indicated that the matter will start on 22^nd July, 2013

¶18

1 of 5

¶19

APPA1156_2013

¶20

looking to the fact that it is a confirmation case. However, the learned counsel

¶21

for the accused sought time stating that it is a voluminous matter and hence on his request, the matter was adjourned to 8^th August, 2013. It was made clear that the appeal preferred by the applicant and the Confirmation case would be heard from that date. Being Confirmation case, the applicant-accused was also directed to be produced in Court on that date. In the meanwhile, the Confirmation case again came on board on 5^th August, 2013 as two applications i.e. Criminal Application Nos. 1 and 2 of 2013 were placed for hearing on that date. On that day also, it was made clear that on 8^th August, 2013, the final hearing of the Confirmation case and appeal would proceed on 8^th August, 2013. However, on 8^th August, 2013, Advocate Mr. I.A. Khan, junior colleague of Advocate Mr. Mehmood Pracha, sought time on behalf of Advocate Mr. Mehmood Pracha and stated that the matter be kept on 12^th August, 2013. On his request, the matter was adjourned to 12^th August, 2013. It was made clear that final hearing of the appeal will proceed on 12^th August, 2013. As the matter was to start on 12^th August, 2013, it was also directed that the accused be produced in the Court on that date. On 12^th August, 2013, the learned counsel for the accused sought time, as he did not have copies of the evidence in the appeal. It is to be noted that neither on 17^th July, 2013, when the matter was admitted, did the counsel raise any such grievance nor on the subsequent dates, when the appeal was to be proceeded with for hearing, any such grievance was raised. It was only on 12^th August, 2013

¶22

2 of 5

¶23

APPA1156_2013

¶24

for the first time the grievance was raised that the copies of paper book were not received and time was sought to prepare the appeal. Prior to this, it was not stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Advocate who conducted the trial did not hand over the copies of evidence and other relevant papers to the learned counsel appearing in this matter or he did not receive from the accused any papers or that he had not received the paper books. It is seen that the learned counsel for the accused made no efforts to collect the papers from the learned counsel who conducted the trial nor made any effort to collect it from the registry. As a matter of fact, as per the provisions of Section 366 of Cr. P.C., whenever an accused is sentenced to death by the Sessions Court, the proceedings are to be submitted to the High Court for confirmation. The paper book and the entire record and proceedings are prepared and submitted to the High Court, the copies of which are made available to both the accused as well as the prosecution. Even on 17^th July, 2013, when the appeal of the accused was admitted, no efforts were made to collect the copies of the paper book. Thereafter on the subsequent dates also, no efforts were made to collect the copies of the paper book. Before this Court, in the appeal preferred by the accused and in the confirmation case, the accused is being represented by an advocate of his choice. The learned counsel Mr. Pracha is assisted by a number of juniors. None of them made any effort to collect the paper book either

¶25

3 of 5

¶26

APPA1156_2013

¶27

from the counsel who conducted the trial or from the accused or from the

¶28

registry of this Court. Despite this an extra set of paper books was made available to the learned counsel for the accused in the morning at 11.00 a.m. itself which is clear from the endorsement. It is seen that from time to time the matter was adjourned on the request made on behalf of the counsel for the applicant-accused.

¶29

Now, at this stage, after the hearing of the matter started on 12^th August, 2013, this application has been preferred by the learned counsel for the accused stating that as the matter is huge and voluminous and the paper book was not available, 8 weeks time be granted to enable him to prepare the present matter. Thereafter the learned counsel for the applicant-accused stated that if time is given upto 26^th August, 2013, thereafter he will not make any request for further time and he will go on with the appeal on merits on 26^th August, 2013.

¶30

In view of the categorical statement made by the learned counsel for the accused that if time is granted till 26^th August, 2013, he will not seek any further time in the matter. In all fairness and in the interest of justice, on his request, we are granting time upto 26^th August, 2013 to enable the learned counsel for the accused to go on with the appeal on merits.

¶31

4 of 5

¶32

APPA1156_2013

¶33

As far as prayer clause (a) is concerned, the learned counsel Mr. Pracha states that he is not pressing it at this stage and he states that he may raise the same while going through the evidence, if found necessary.

¶34

In view of the above, Application is disposed of.

¶35

(MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)

¶36

5 of 5

Mirza Himayat Baig @ Ahmed Baig Inayat Mirza @ Hasan v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mirza Himayat Baig @ Ahmed Baig Inayat Mirza @ Hasan v. the State of Maharashtra

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

Vinayak Arjun Satpute Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinayak Arjun Satpute Vs the State of Maharashtra

Popat Bhanudas Mandlik Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharat Ananda Kumbhar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dinkar Dagadu Katare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijay Sopan Tarade Vs the State of Maharashtra