The court rejected a criminal application seeking leave to file an appeal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court held that the delay of over 500 days was excessive and found no merit in condoning it.
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 26-crappln1680-15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1680 OF 2015
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1679 OF 2015
Kishor s/o. Guruling Waghnna..Applicant
Versus
Anirudha s/o. Lalasaheb Patil
and anr.
..Respondents
Mr.S.S.Panale, advocate for applicant
Mr.N.J.Patil, advocate for respondent no.1
Mr.R.B.Bagul, APP for respondent no.2
CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.
DATE : JANUARY 07, 2016
PER COURT :
Heard both sides.
2]Aggrieved by dismissal of the complaint filed
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act in default and acquittal of the respondent,
present applicant/original complainant wants to
prefer an application for grant of leave to file
2 26-crappln1680-15.odt
appeal and since there is delay of 581 days,
present application for condonation of delay is
filed.
3]Submissions from both sides as well as the
copy of Roznama would show that the complaint was
filed on 5thFebruary, 2010. After securing
appearance of the present respondent/accused, the
applicant complainant remained absent on many
dates, still learned Judicial Magistrate F.C.
adjourned the matter. The application filed by the
applicant/complainant for issuance of non bailable
warrant to the respondent/accused, was allowed on
costs, but the costs was not deposed by the
applicant. This continued from 26th August, 2010
till the date of dismissal of the complaint on 27th
June, 2013. Even, earlier, learned Judicial
Magistrate F.C. had fixed the complaint for
passing the order of dismissal of the complaint
thereby a forewarning was given to the applicant
3 26-crappln1680-15.odt
that in case, no progress is made, the complaint
would be dismissed.
4]Upon hearing both sides, in my view, there is
no merit in the present case. In the
circumstances, there is no need to condone the
delay of 518 days caused in preferring the
application for grant of leave to file appeal.
The application is therefore, rejected.
5]In view of the above, the application for
grant of leave to file the appeal, does not
survive and stands disposed of.
kbp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay of over 500 days is justified for filing a leave application under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Kishor s/o Guruling Waghnna
Anirudha s/o Lalasaheb Patil
M.T. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court