The single judicial member approved an application for condonation of delay filed in a criminal appeal, finding that sufficient cause was disclosed for the delay.
Application for condonation of delay allowed and disposed of.
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.
923 condonation.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 126 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL STAMP NO. 759 OF 2014
JIWAN @ DEVENDRA NATHU CHALSE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. M.A. Tandale (appointed) APP for Respondent : Mrs. S.G. Chincholkar
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 7TH JANUARY, 2015.
PER COURT:
1] Counsel (appointed) to represent the appellant, has tendered across the bar, the memo of appeal accompanied with the judgment of the trial court and also the application for condonation of delay. Office to register the same.
2] Heard counsel for the applicant. Perused the contents of the application. Sufficient cause has been disclosed. Application stands allowed and hence, disposed of.
[A.M. BADAR] [S.S. SHINDE] JUDGE JUDGE.
grt/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause is disclosed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal.
Jiwan @ Devendra Nathu Chalse
The State of Maharashtra
S.S. Shinde
A.M. Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
