Shankar S/O Natthulal Solanki vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1742 Bom

                                                1                         904 revn393..19.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

           CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPR) NO. 393 OF 2019 IN
       CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (REVN) NO. 123 OF 2020
                   Shankar Natthulal Solanki (in jail)
                                    Vs.
    State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., Lakadganj, Nagpur and others
_______________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions                Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
                  Shri C.F. Bhagwani, Advocate for applicant.
                  Shri I.J. Damle, Advocate for non-applicant No.1
                  Shri K.M. Kshirsagar, Advocate for non-applicant Nos.2 to 4.


                                 CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATE : JANUARY 27, 2021.

This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the revision. The delay is of 390 days.

(2) Though the office note shows that notices to the non-applicant Nos.2 to 4 are yet to be served, Shri K.M. Kshirsagar, learned counsel submits that he is appearing for non-applicant Nos.2 to 4 and infact he has filed Vakalatnama as well as reply to the application for condonation of delay.

(3) By this revision application, the applicant is challenging the judgment and order dated 09.08.2018 passed by learned Extra Joint Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No.261 of 2017 filed on behalf of

2 904 revn393..19.odt

the present non-applicant Nos.2 to 4, whereby the learned Judge of the Appellate Court has set aside the judgment of learned Trial Court returning the muddemal property and directed that the muddemal property be handed over to the present non-applicant Nos.2 to 4.

(4) The judgment and order is dated 09.08.2018. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant, in some other case for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, is in jail from 20.05.2018. Thus, when the judgment impugned was passed the applicant was in jail.

(5) In that view of matter, I am satisfied that the delay is properly explained, though it is vehemently opposed by Shri K.M. Kshirsagar, the learned counsel for the non- applicant no.2 to 4.

(6) The application is allowed by condoning the delay of 390 days.

(7) The office is directed to place this revision for its admission after three weeks.

JUDGE Wagh