A single judge allowed an application for condonation of a 193-day delay in preferring an appeal against conviction and sentence, holding that the delay should be condoned in the interest of justice.
The delay of 193 days in preferring the appeal is condoned; the application is allowed.
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.
Dixit
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1240 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO.740 OF 2017
Sudhir Shankar Kadam …. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …. Respondent
None for the Applicant.
Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.J.
DATE : 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2017.
P.C. :
[DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.]
1/1
APPA-1240-17==.doc
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 193 days in preferring an appeal against conviction and sentence warrants condonation.
Whether the application for condonation of delay should be allowed in the interest of justice.
Sudhir Shankar Kadam
The State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
