Disposed¶24

The Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC7 Jan 2026IA/2734/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay of 20 days; application for leave to appeal; CBI Economic Offence Wing Mumbai vs State of Maharashtra; High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction; Interim Application No.2734 of 2024 in Criminal Application (ST) No.12492 of 2024; impugned order dated 24/01/2024; competent authority orders received 19/03/2024; legal vetting by retainer counsel 12/04/2024; filed 14/05/2024; delay held not intentional or deliberate; leave granted; appeal to be registered.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 20 days condoned; application for leave to file Appeal allowed; Appeal directed to be registered; Interim Application No.2734 of 2024 disposed of. ¶24

The Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 / 2 43-IA-2734-24-IN-ALS-ST-12492-24.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2734 OF 2024 (For condonation of delay) IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO.12492 OF 2024 (For Leave to file an Appeal)

¶5

Central Bureau of Investigation Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents

¶6

Mr. Kuldeep Patil, Advocate for Applicant/CBI.

¶7

¶8

¶9

Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶10

None present for Respondent No.2.

¶11

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 16^th APRIL, 2026

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

By the present Interim Application, the Applicant is

¶14

seeking condonation of delay of 20 days in filing the application for leave to Appeal. This Court had issued notices to the Respondents. The office remark shows that the notices are duly served. None appears for the Respondents.

¶15

MANUSHREE NESARIKAR

¶16

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.04.18 11:23:59 +0530

¶17

We have perused the copy of the application. The

¶18

Applicant’s contention qua condonation of delay is that the impugned order was passed on 24/01/2024. Thereafter the

¶19

Nesarikar

¶20

2 / 2 43-IA-2734-24-IN-ALS-ST-12492-24.odt

¶21

orders from the competent authority to file the application for leave to Appeal were received on 19/03/2024. After receipt of the said orders, the draft was prepared by the Senior P.P. After receiving the draft, the draft of the application was sent to the retainer counsel for CBI for legal vetting on 12/04/2024. Thereafter the present application was filed on 14/05/2024. Thus, there was delay of 20 days in filing the application.

¶22

After hearing the learned counsel for the Applicant, we are satisfied that the delay which is caused in filing the present application for leave to Appeal is not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentioned in the application. Therefore, we allow the said application.

¶23

The delay is condoned.

¶24

Interim Application No.2734 of 2024 is disposed of.

¶25

The application for leave to file Appeal is allowed.

¶26

The Appeal be registered.

¶27

(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)

¶28

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

The Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Central Bureau of Investigation, Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravi Ghai vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra vs Aakash Ashok Oval and Anr.

Kalayani Ajay Ahire vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nilesh Kisan Waghe vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra vs Umesh Alias Sagar Nandu Sawant and Anr.

Madhurajsing @ Rajasing Darogasing Badoria vs State of Maharashtra