Bombay High Court
Mahadeo S/O. Vishnupant Khendkar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 5 July, 2017
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
wp243.17 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.243 OF 2017
Mahadeo S/o Vishnupant Khendkar,
Aged about 55 years,Occ-Service,
R/o Gourashan Road, Akola,
Tahil and District-Akola. ..... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station,Old City,Akola,
Akola. ...NON-APPLICANTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smt. Jayshree Junghare, advocate for petitioner.
Shri R.S.Nayak,A.P.P. for State
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- JULY 5,2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned counsel for the parties.
2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is
challenging the order passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-2,Akola, in O.M.C.No.24/2014 dated 14/2/2017, by which
::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 00:54:23 :::
wp243.17 2
learned Judge has dismissed the application for condonation of
delay and refused to condone the delay for preferring revision
before the said Court.
3. The record shows that initially the present petitioner
approached this Court by filing petition under Section 482 of
Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the rejection of his
application for discharge. The said petition was dismissed by this
Court on 9/12/2013 by observing that in view of the law laid
down by this Court in Narayandas Sarda..vs..State of
Maharashtra and others, 2009(2)Mh.L.J.426 the remedy of
revision is available.
4. After dismissal of Criminal Application No.230/2013
by this Court on 09/12/2013 the present petitioner preferred
revision before the revisional Court challenging the rejection of his
discharge application. Since the revision was barredby limitation
an application under the Limitation Act was preferred. The said
application was registered as O.M.C.No.24/2014. The delay was
370 days. In the said application, it was specifically mentioned by
the present petitioner that prior to filing revision application the
::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 00:54:23 :::
wp243.17 3
petitioner approached to this Court by moving the petition under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the
application on the ground that counsel for the petitioner is absent
and no documents are filed on record.
6. The revision application and application for
condonation of delay were filed on 13/2/2014. Thus,
immediately the revision was preferred. It was specifically
contended on oath by the applicant about the factum of pendency
of the application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal
Procedure before this Court and it is dismissed on 09/12/2013.
The learned Judge in my view has committed a mistake in not
applying the relevant provisions of the Limitation Act and thus it
has resulted into the miscarriage of justice. Hence, the order
dated 14/2/2017 is quashed and set aside. Hence, I pass the
following order.
ORDER
I) The O.M.C.No.24/2014 for codonation of delay in
preferring the revision before Sessions Court, Akola is
hereby allowed.
ii) The delay is condoned.
iii) The learned Additional Sessions Judge,Akola is
directed to register the revision and decide the same in
accordance with the law.
Rule is made absolute,with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
kitey
