Single Judge dismissed an interim application seeking condonation of a 138-day delay in filing a Criminal Revision Application, rejecting the ground of mental shock due to a prior dismissal of a much larger delay (577 days) in the lower court. It also dismissed the pending revision application.
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.
905-ia4411-22.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
VASANT Digitally signed byVASANT ANANDRAO ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2023.12.13 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4411 OF 2022 IDHOL 20:04:30 +0530 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (ST.) NO.18713 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4412 OF 2022
Vasudevan K. Paramathi ...Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
Ms.Shilpa Gajare for the Applicant.
Mrs.M.R. Tidke, APP for the State - Respondent No.1.
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 8TH DECEMBER, 2023.
P.C. :-
1/3
905-ia4411-22.doc
paternity of the second child of Respondent No.2. The said order dated 19 April 2018, was challenged by Applicant in Sessions Court, where there was delay of 577 days in filing an Appeal in Sessions Court was dismissed, on the ground that there was no reasons sufficient to condone the delay in filing an Appeal before the Sessions Court.
“7. That the applicant was in great shock after passing the order dated 5.3.2022 by the Hon’ble Addl. Sessions Court, Mumbai and took time to bring his life back on normal routine. And therefore the delay is caused to file the present revision application along with Application for Condonation of Delay and Application for Stay.”
2/3
905-ia4411-22.doc
condonation application before this Court.
vs. State of Kerala & Anr. reported in (1997) SCC 556 , did not condone delay of 565 days in filing Appeal. Division Bench of this Court, refused to condone delay of 315 days in filing the Appeal in the matter of Interim Application No.604 of 2020, passed in order dated 10 January 2023.
(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone a delay of 138 days in filing a Criminal Revision Application when the applicant previously faced dismissal for a much larger delay in filing an Appeal in the lower court.
Whether the explanation of mental shock following a lower court order suffices to condone the filing delay.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.K. Ramachandran vs. State of KeralaReferred¶22
P.K. Ramachandran vs. State of Kerala & Anr. reported in (1997) SCC 556 · Who else cites this
Vasudevan K. Paramathi
The State of Maharashtra
RAJESH S. PATIL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
