Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra vs Saquib Abdul Hamid Nachan And Ors on 4 September, 2018
Author: Mridula Bhatkar
Bench: S. S. Shinde, Mridula Bhatkar
1 19.461.16 appln.doc
ISM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 461 OF 2016
The State of Maharashtra .....Applicant
V/s.
Saquib Abdul Hamid Nachan and others .....Respondents
Mr. J. P. Yagnik APP for the State
Ms. Rohini Salien SPP
Mr. Saquib Abdul Hamid Nachan accused no. 1 in person
Ms. Tahera Abdul Rashid Qureshi for respondent nos. 2, 4 & 6
Mr. Bhavesh Pasbola I/b Mr. Rahul Arote for respondent nos. 3, 9,
10 & 13
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE AND
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 4, 2018.
P.C.
Heard the learned APP appearing for the State, the learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3, 9, 10 & 13 and the learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2, 4 & 6. All the respondents have been served.
Digitally signed by Iresh
Iresh Siddharam
Siddharam Mashal
Date:
Mashal 2018.09.06
11:38:24 +0530
2 19.461.16 appln.doc
2 The learned APP appearing for the State invites our attention
to the averments of the application and submits that the delay of 85 days in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned. 3 On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3, 9, 10 & 13 vehemently opposed the prayer in the application and submits that no sufficient reasons/explanation has been offered in the application so as to condone the delay. 4 We have considered the submissions of the learned APP and the counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3, 9, 10 & 13. We have carefully perused the reasons stated in the application. There is a delay of 85 days which deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice.
5 Application stands disposed of. Let the appeal be numbered and listed on 09/10/2018.
[MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] [S. S. SHINDE, J.]