In an application for restoration of a dismissed criminal revision, the Bombay High Court granted relief. The court held that the applicant did not know the dismissal was due to want of prosecution and the delay was condonable, resulting in the restoration of the revision application.
Revision application restored to file; dismissal order vacated.
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.
1 901.308.15 appr
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 308 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 331 OF 2014
Dhanraj Babruwan More .....Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent
Mr. Priyal Sarda i/b Mr. Vikram Tarepail for Applicant Mrs. A. A. Mane APP for the State.
CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 29, 2015.
PC :
Heard. Applicant herein was convicted by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 3 Solapur in S.T.C. No. 148 of 2011 for offence punishable under section 332 and 353 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order, applicant herein had filed criminal appeal no. 104 of 2012 before Sessions Court at Solapur. By Judgment and Order dated 30/08/2014, Sessions Court had dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order, applicant had filed revision application no. 331 of 2014. Applicant was not take into custody.
ism
2 901.308.15 appr
was pleased to suspend the substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant and applicant was enlarged on bail, however, revision application was not admitted on that day. On 18/06/2014, criminal revision was called out for hearing. None appeared for the applicant and therefore, this Court (Coram: M. L. Tahaliyanni, J.) was pleased to dismiss the revision application and adinterim order was vacated. Applicant was taken into custody on 24/08/2015. Applicant has filed present application seeking restoration of the revision application.
fact that applicant had no knowledge that the revision application was dismissed for want of prosecution.
(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)
ism
3 901.308.15 appr
CERTIFICATE
Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order.
ism
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the revision application should be condoned to restore the same to file.
Whether the applicant should be restored to file and the previous order dismissing the revision application quashed.
Dhanraj Babruwan More
The State of Maharashtra
Sadhana S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
