Disposed

State of Maharashtra, through A.C.P. Sakkardara Division, Nagpur v. Bannasingh @ Rupsingh S/O Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri and Others

Bombay HC16 Dec 2016APPA/244/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered appeals filed under the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging an acquittal. The court condoned a delay of 84 days, noting pending leave-to-appeal applications by the informant and victim, and listed matters for further consideration.

What did the court decide?

Condoned delay of 84 days in criminal application numbers 244 and 245 of 2015 for further consideration.

State of Maharashtra, through A.C.P. Sakkardara… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 appa244.15+1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.244 OF 2015

¶4

(STATE OF MAH. THR. ACP..VS..BANNASINGH @ RUPSINGH ATTARSINGH BAWRI & 2 OTH.) IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2015.

¶6

AND

¶7

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.245 OF 2015

¶8

(STATE OF MAH. THR. ACP..VS..BANNASINGH @ RUPSINGH ATTARSINGH BAWRI & 2 OTH.) IN

¶9

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2015.

¶10

¶11

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶12

¶13

Shri S.S.Doifode, A.P.P. for Applicant.

¶14

Shri A.V. Band, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent No.1. Shri P.K. Dahat, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent No.2.

¶15

CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI AND KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

¶16

DATED : DECEMBER 16, 2016.

¶17

These appeals are filed by State Government respectively under Section 377(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement and under Section 12 of MCOC Act read with Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure assailing acquittal.

¶18

There is delay of 84 days in filing the appeals and hence, Criminal Application Nos. 244 and 245 of 2015 are taken up for condoning it.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. is relying upon the affidavit in support to urge that because of administrative compliance required to be made the delay has occurred. He also points

¶20

2 appa244.15+1

¶21

out that the informant and victim have filed their separate appeals challenging very same judgment and those appeals are within time.

¶22

Advocate Shri Band and Advocate Shri Dahat (appointed) opposed the prayer for condonation of delay. They submit that leave as sought for by informant and victim is still not granted.

¶23

As those appeals seeking leave are pending, in absence of proof of any malafides on behalf of the Government, we are inclined to condone the delay.

¶24

The request of the Government for grant of leave to appeal will be considered along with similar requests of informant and the victim.

¶25

Needless to mention that Shri Dahat appears for respondent No.3-Julfisingh in this matter. The High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee to note accordingly.

¶26

List with connected matters for further consideration after vacations. Criminal Appeal No. 116 of 2015 filed by informant shall also be placed on that date for consideration.

¶27

JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

RRaut..

State of Maharashtra, through A.C.P. Sakkardara Division, Nagpur v. Bannasingh @ Rupsingh S/O Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Maharashtra, through A.C.P. Sakkardara Division, Nagpur v. Bannasingh @ Rupsingh S/O Attarsingh @ Navnihalsingh @ Doulatsingh Bawri and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Firoz Mostafa Zaman S/O. Waheduzzaman Sarkar and Others Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. the Police Station Officer, Panchpaoli Nagpur and Another

The Sikh Education Society, Bezonbagh, Nagpur, through General Secretary Sardar Parshan Singh Kalsi Vs the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur and Others

Manjusha W/O. Anand Shinde Vs Anand S/O. Waman Shinde and Another

Shri. Mahadev Jagganath Jankar, Ministry for Animal Husbandary Dairy Deve. Dept. Mumbai Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary Home Department Mantralaya Mumbai and Others

Shri. Tarachand S/O. Bisan Sakure, through Its P.O.A. Shri. Pramod Prabhakar Bhandarkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Housing and Special Assistance Dept. and Others

Shri. Vasant S/O. Manikrao Mankar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Dhantoli Nagpur and Another