M/S. Ajs Impex Pvt. Ltd vs Asmita Engineering Pvt. Ltd., And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6296 Bom

                                                                19-APPLN-10-2016.doc


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.10 OF 2016

 M/s.AJS IMPEX PVT. LTD.                                  )...APPLICANT

          V/s.

 ASMITA ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. & ORS.                      )...RESPONDENTS


 Mr.Ashok Saraogi, Advocate for the Applicant.

 Ms.Namrata Kadam i/b. Mr.Amarbhatt, Advocate for Respondent 
 Nos.1 to 4.

 Mr.Vinod Chate, APP for the Respondent - State.


                               CORAM       :      A. M. BADAR, J.

                               DATE        :      16th AUGUST 2017

 P.C. :


 1                This is an application for condonation of delay in filing 

an application for leave to appeal for challenging acquittal of

respondent nos.1 to 4 of the offence punishable under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

 avk                                                                         1/3





                                                                   19-APPLN-10-2016.doc


 2                Heard the learned advocate for the applicant as well as 

the learned advocate appearing for respondent nos.1 to 4. The

learned APP appears for respondent no.5.

3 Duly sworned testimony of the applicant / original

complainant is to the effect that though certified copy of the

judgment and order of acquittal was available to the applicant on

11th February 2015, his learned advocate had retained all papers

of the proceedings including the certified copy of judgment and

order. After much persuasion, the same was handed over to the

applicant in the middle of month of August 2015, which has

resulted in delay of lodging the application for leave to appeal.

4 The learned advocate appearing for respondent nos.1

to 4 vehemently opposed this application by contending that there

is no sufficient cause for filing an application beyond limitation. It

is further argued that the delay is inordinate and the applicant

had so many options to get proceedings and order of the trial

court. Electronic order is also acceptable.

 avk                                                                           2/3





                                                                  19-APPLN-10-2016.doc


 5                I  have  considered the rival submissions and perused 

 the   pleadings   of   parties.     When   technicalities   of   procedure   are 

pitted against cause of substantial justice, cause of substantial

justice should always prevail. By condoning the delay, the

ultimate result will be decision of the matter on merits.

6 Considering the reasons stated, I am of the view that

the applicant has made out sufficient cause in condoning the

delay. Hence the order :

i) The application is allowed.

ii) Delay in preferring the application for leave to

appeal is condoned.

iii) Put up the application for leave for Admission

on 29th August 2017.

                                                  (A. M. BADAR, J.)




 avk                                                                          3/3