Allowed

Sahebrao Sudam Divikar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC13 Sept 2023APPLN/2821/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed condonation of delay of 4448 days in a criminal appeal filed by an original accused in a Sessions Case for life imprisonment. The court held that being in jail and deprived of proper legal advice warrants condoning the delay as the appeal is a right available to the convict.

What did the court decide?

Application for condonation of delay allowed and disposed of; registery verified to register the appeal.

Sahebrao Sudam Divikar Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

907 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2023
IN APPEALST/7786/2023

¶3

SAHEBRAO SUDAM DIVIKAR

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶6

Ms. Vanita H. Sangole, Advocate h/f Mrs. S.T. Kazi, Advocate for applicant
Mr. A.M. Phule, APP for respondent No.1

¶7

CORAM :SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
DATE:13th SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

1Present application has been filed for condonation of delay of

¶10

4448 days in filing criminal appeal. The appellant is the original accused

¶11

No.1 in Sessions Case No.13/2009. He was held guilty of committing offence

¶12

punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand only), in default to suffer simple imprisonment for
three months by learned District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge,

¶13

2 Cri.Appln_2821_2023

¶14

Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar on 25.03.2011. The fine amount was directed
to be given to PW 1 i.e. present respondent No.2. She has been served in the
matter, however, she has failed to appear. In fact, whether to condone the
delay in filing the criminal appeal is to be decided by the Court on its own
merits and, therefore, we are not appointing Amicus Curiae to represent
respondent No.2 for the reasons stated in paragraph No.2 i.e. the reasons for
delay. It appears that the appellant is in jail since 30.12.2008. Unfortunately,
it appears that he could not get the proper legal advice in the prison. Since
he is in jail and the appeal is a right available to him to challenge his
conviction, the delay stand condoned. Application stands allowed and
disposed of. Registry to verify and register the appeal.

¶15

(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)

¶16

( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )

¶17

agd

Sahebrao Sudam Divikar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahebrao Sudam Divikar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Manoj S/O Bhimrao Chaudhante Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Subhash S/O Ganesh Gir

Subhash S/O Ganesh Gir Vs the State of Maharashtra

Manohar S/O Uttamrao Sadavarte and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankarlal Binduram Sharma Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Kailas Waman Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra