Allowed¶23

Cbi, Bs and Fc, Mumbai v. Himanshu Suresh Gandhi and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Feb 2026IA/2985/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; 28 days' delay; leave to file appeal; Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Mumbai; Himanshu Suresh Gandhi & Ors.; Criminal Application (ST) No.15945 of 2024; Interim Application No.2985 of 2024; High Court of Judicature at Bombay; Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction; Sarang V. Kotwal & Sandesh D. Patil, JJ.; certified copy delay; Head Office approval of draft appeal; leave granted; appeal to be registered.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 28 days in filing the application for leave to file Appeal condoned; application for leave to file Appeal allowed; Appeal to be registered; Interim Application No.2985 of 2024 disposed of. ¶23

Cbi, Bs and Fc, Mumbai vs Himanshu Suresh Gandhi and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 / 2 44-IA-2985-24-IN-ALS-ST-15945-24.odt.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2985 OF 2024 (For condonation of delay) IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO.15945 OF 2024 (For Leave to file an Appeal)

¶5

Central Bureau of Investigation, Mumbai

¶6

versus

¶7

Himanshu Suresh Gandhi & Ors.

¶8

.... Respondents

¶9

Mr. Kuldeep Patil, Advocate for Applicant.

¶10

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

¶11

Mr. Dhiraj Mirajkar a/w Mr. Vikas Kapile a/w Ms. Maitreyee Gadgil, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 5.

¶12

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

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

The present Interim Application is filed by the Applicant seeking condonation of delay of 28 days in filing the application for leave to Appeal. This Court had issued notices to the Respondent in the application for condonation of delay. All the Respondents are served.

¶15

MANUSHREE NESARIKAR

¶16

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.04.18 11:24:00 +0530

¶17

The Applicant’s case is that the impugned Judgment and order was passed on 28/03/2024. The certified copy was applied on 01/04/2024. The same was ready on 19/04/2024.

¶18

Nesarikar

¶19

2 / 2 44-IA-2985-24-IN-ALS-ST-15945-24.odt.odt

¶20

The proposal was sent to the CBI along with the draft of Appeal on 03/05/2024. The same draft was approved by the Head Office on 12/07/2024. The application is filed on 28/07/2024. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant contends that the delay is for the reasons mentioned above.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 does not seriously oppose the application for condonation of delay.

¶22

Having heard the counsel appearing for the respective parties, we find that the delay which is caused in filing the present application, is not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentioned above. We, therefore, condone the delay.

¶23

The application for condonation of delay is allowed. The delay of 28 days in filing the application for leave to file Appeal is accordingly condoned.

¶24

Interim Application No.2985 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.)

Cbi, Bs and Fc, Mumbai v. Himanshu Suresh Gandhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cbi, Bs and Fc, Mumbai v. Himanshu Suresh Gandhi and Ors.

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

Kanchan Akshay Shinde vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra vs Moinuddin Abubakar Shaikh and Anr.

Amar Divakar Mishra vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sabiha Umar Siddique vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jasmine Ajayan vs Swastik Realtors and 5 Ors.

Ravi Ghai vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.