Application to condone a delay of 1 year 31 days in filing a criminal appeal under Section 11 of the MPID Act, challenging attachment of property. The court found the grounds bonafide and allowed the 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.
1/2 29 IA 2855-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2855 OF 2024
IN CRIMINAL APPEAL ST NO. 15279 of 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL ST NO. 15279 OF 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 762 OF 2024
Reenu Rohit Gupta
Versus
The Competent Authority and anr .. Respondents
Mr. Mihir Desai, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Chetan Alai, Akshay Patni, Rama Somani, Bhushan Bhadgale, Ms.Rahi Patil, Ashutosh Karangutkar i/b Chetan Alai for the appellant.
Ms.Rebecca Gonsalves Spl. P.P with Mr.D.J. Haldankar, APP for the State.
Mr.Arvind Lakhawat with Nimeet Sharma i/b MZM Legal LLP for the intervenor.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE,JJ.
DATED: 20th AUGUST, 2024
P.C:-
applicant.
The application seek condonation of delay of 1 year 31 days in filing the Criminal Appeal under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.
Tilak
2/2 29 IA 2855-24.doc
The perusal of the application and in particular, paragraph nos.3 to 7 highlight the steps taken by the applicant after she came to know about the receipt of notice dated 1/2/2024 directing the original owner to attend the attachment proceedings of the property scheduled on 13/2/2024.
In paragraph no.8, it is specifically stated that the applicant/appellant filed an objection before the Supreme Court Committee challenging the attachment proceedings and it is only upon the reply filed to the objections by the NSEL, the applicant gained knowledge that the subject property was attached by the Government vide its notification dated 11/4/2016 and attributing knowledge from the proceedings on 19/4/2023 before the MPID, the delay is sought to be justified.
2 On hearing the learned counsel, on perusal of the grounds in the application requesting for condonation of delay, since we find that the grounds stated are bonafide, Interim Application is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
Appeal is directed to be listed on condoning the delay.
We deem it appropriate to list the Appeals which are now ready for hearing on 29/8/2024.
(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE,J) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Tilak
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 1 year 31 days in filing the criminal appeal under Section 11 MPID Act should be condoned.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Reenu Rohit Gupta
The Competent Authority
NSEL (intervenor)
Bharati Dangre
Manjusha Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
