Anand Periyarswami Arjun vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 13350 Bom

                                                         1 of 2                 09-ia-4351-22


                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4351 OF 2022
                                                    IN
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 21194 OF 2022

                     Anand Periyarswami Arjun                             ..Applicant.
                          Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                      ..Respondents

                                                 __________
                     Mr. Gajendra Jadhav for Applicant.
                     Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for State/Respondent No.1.
                                                 __________

                                              CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 20th DECEMBER 2022 PC :

1. Leave to amend to conceal the identity of the

Respondent No.2. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2. This is an application for condonation of delay of one

year and eight days in filing the Criminal appeal. The Applicant

was convicted and sentenced by learned Special Judge under

POCSO Act, Greater Mumbai vide his Judgment and order dated

29/09/2021 passed in POCSO Special Case No.667 of 2018.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, since Digitally signed by VINOD VINOD BHASKAR BHASKAR GOKHALE GOKHALE Date:

        2022.12.21    Gokhale
        13:34:28
        +0530
                                    2 of 2                 09-ia-4351-22

September 2018 the applicant is in custody. He is in poor financial

state. He could not make an arrangement for filing the Appeal

immediately after his conviction and, therefore, there is delay of

one year and eight days.

4. Considering these submissions and in the interest of

justice, delay in preferring the Appeal is condoned. The Appeal be

processed further.

5. The Application is disposed of.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)