This is a brief order where the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench condensed a 10-day delay for the State in filing an appeal under Section 377(1) CrPC. The convicted appeal was registered and the application disposed of.
Criminal Application No.1951 of 2020 is allowed; registry directed to register the appeal and the matter is 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.
{1} CRI APPLN 1951 OF 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
908 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1951 OF 2020
WITH APPEAL/44/2020 WITH ALS/112/2020
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
VERSUS
DYANDEV TRIMBAK UKIRDE
APP for Applicant : Mr.S.D.Ghayal
Advocate for Respondent : Mr.D.B.Gaikwad and Mr.R.A.Jaiswal
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
DATE : 8 SEPTEMBER, 2023
PER COURT :-
1. The respondent, who is the original accused in this case is
served. On the last occasion i.e. on 24-08-2023, Mr.Omprakash
Waghmare, learned Advocate h/f. Mr.R.A.Jaiwal, learned Advocate,
submitted that Mr.Jaiwal has no instructions in the matter now and
record shows that Mr.D.B.Gaikwad filed Vakalatnama but he had not
taken consent of the earlier Advocate. Under the said circumstance,
we have issued notice to respondent and he has been served.
2. The present application seeks condonation of delay of 10 days
in filing criminal appeal by the State under Section 377(1) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
{2} CRI APPLN 1951 OF 2020
3.In view of the said position, taking into consideration the
duration of the delay also, we condoned the delay. Criminal
Application No.1951 of 2020 is allowed and disposed of. The registry
is directed to register the appeal.
4. After the dictation was over, Mr.D.B.Gaikwad, learned Advocate appeared and submitted that infact the matter would be worked out by Mr.R.A.Jaiswal.
We would leave it to them as to who should appear in the
matter but that should be procedurally done.
5. As aforesaid, the delay stands condoned. Further their appears
to be a separate application for leave to appeal by the State
challenging acquittal of the accused from offence under Sections 363,
366(A), 376(2)(j) and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under
Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act (POCSO). Issue notice in respect of said application to the
respondent. Mr.Gaikwad, learned Advocate waives service of notice
for the respondent.
{3} CRI APPLN 1951 OF 2020
6. We would hear the matter as regards Application for Leave to
Appeal by State No.112 of 2020 and appeal under Section 377(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the next date i.e. 09-10-2023.( ABHAY S. WAGHWASE ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ) JUDGE JUDGE
SPT
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 10 days in filing the criminal appeal by the State under Section 377(1) CrPC should be condoned.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Dyandev Trimbak Ukirde
Vibha Kankanwadi
Abhay S. Waghwas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court