Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Bank Of Maharashtra vs The State Of Maharashtra (Eow) And Ors on 8 August, 2024

Author: Bharati Dangre

Bench: Bharati Dangre

2024:BHC-AS:32680-DB

                                                 1/2                    24 IA.2427.2024.odt



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2427 OF 2024
                                              IN
                           CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 13092 OF 2024

               Bank of Maharashtra                           ..     Applicant
                                       Versus
               The State of Maharashtra and Ors.             ..     Respondents

                                                       ...

               Mr. Subir Kumar a/w Valenetinc Mascarenhas and Mr.
               Abhinav Palsikar i/b SDS Advocates, for the Applicant- (BOM).

               Mr. Aditya G. and Vinayak Garje and Amir Qureshi, for
               Respondent No. 3.
               Ms Rebecca Gonsalves, Spl.P.P. a/w Mr. D. J. Haldankar, APP,
               for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

                                                       ...

                                          CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
                                                  MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : 8th AUGUST, 2024 P.C:-

1. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant in support of the Application seeking condonation of delay of 188 days in filing the Appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 03.12.2022 passed by the Sessions Court. The Appeal under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 is filed admittedly beyond 60 days and the Application has set out the reasons for the delay.

R.V.Patil ::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 17/08/2024 08:31:10 ::: 2/2 24 IA.2427.2024.odt

2. On hearing the learned counsel for the Applicant and perusal of the Application it is apparent that, the Appeal ought to have been filed on 01.02.2023, but the Applicant initially filed the Civil Wrrit Petition on 07.08.2023 and, thereafter by withdrawing the same, instituted a Criminal Wrrit Petition on 22.01.2024, and since the proceedings were not maintainable, has filed the present Appeal on 22.06.2024.

Though Ms Gonsalves raised serious objection that even the first proceedings in form of the Civil Wrrit Petition was filed after a delay since we have noticed that the delay is not malafide and it is the claim of the Applicant that he was prosecuting wrong remedy and in any case the procedural obstacle will not prevent the matter being heard on merit, we are inclined to allow the Interim Application.

Interim Application is allowed by condoning the delay of 188 days in filing the Appeal. The Appeal is directed to be registered.

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.) R.V.Patil ::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 17/08/2024 08:31:10 :::