The State of Maharashtra v. Sumit Navinchandra Karodiya and Anr.

Bombay HC9 Jan 2026IA/2414/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction: condonation of 19 days' delay in filing leave-to-appeal application by the State of Maharashtra against acquittal dated 04/02/2025 by Additional Sessions Judge-4 / Special Judge (POCSO Act), Thane, in Special (P) Case No.234 of 2022; delay held unintentional (certified-copy and Law & Judiciary Department processing delays); IA No.2414 of 2025 allowed and disposed of; coram Sarang V. Kotwal and Sandesh D. Patil, JJ.; decision dated 21 April 2026.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 19 days in filing the application for leave to file an Appeal condoned; Interim Application allowed and disposed of. ¶ORDER

The State of Maharashtra vs Sumit Navinchandra… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

1 / 3 21-IA-2414-25-IN-ALS-ST-13284-25.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2414 OF 2025 (For condonation of delay)

¶4

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO.13284 OF 2025 (For Leave to file an Appeal)

¶6

The State of Maharashtra

¶7

.... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

Sumit Navinchandra Karodiya & Anr. .... Respondents

¶10

Mr. Ashish Satpute, APP for the State/Applicant.

¶11

Mr. Anil G. Lalla a/w Mr. Yash Pulekar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶12

Ms. Saswati Deb, appointed Advocate by Legal Aid, for Respondent No.2.

¶13

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 21^st APRIL, 2026

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

The present Interim Application is filed for

¶16

MANUSHREE NESARIKAR

¶17

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.04.24 12:11:53 +0530

¶18

condonation of delay of 19 days caused in filing the Criminal Application for leave to file an Appeal against the Judgment and

¶19

Order of acquittal dated 04/02/2025 passed by the Additional

¶20

Sessions Judge-4 and Special Judge under POCSO Act, Thane in

¶21

Nesarikar

¶22

2 / 3 21-IA-2414-25-IN-ALS-ST-13284-25.odt

¶23

Special (P) Case No.234 of 2022. This Court had issued notices to the Respondents. The Respondents are duly served. However, they have not filed their affidavit-in-reply.

¶24

Learned APP appearing for the Applicant states that the impugned Judgment and Order was passed on 04/02/2025 and the application for certified copy was preferred on 15/02/2025. It was ready on 15/03/2025. The papers were forwarded to Law and Judiciary Department, requesting for preferring an Appeal. The papers were received from Law and Judiciary Department on 28/04/2025. Thereafter, the present application was filed on 20/06/2025. He submitted that delay thus is not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentions above.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents strongly opposed the application.

¶26

After having heard all the parties, we are of the view that the delay which is caused in filing the application, is not intentional but for the reasons mentioned in paragraph Nos.2

¶27

3 / 3 21-IA-2414-25-IN-ALS-ST-13284-25.odt

¶28

and 3 of the Interim Application. We are satisfied that the delay deserves to be condoned.

¶29