Bombay High Court
Prajakta W/O Tushar Wankhade And 4 ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Ajani ... on 23 June, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
1 16.APPA.616-21 WITH APEAL.750-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 616 OF 2021
( Sau Prajakta w/o Tushar Wankhade & Ors.
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. )
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 750 OF 2019
( Prashil S/o Sudhakarrao Nagpure
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. )
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders or directions and
Registrar's orders
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for the Applicant in APPA 616/2021.
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/Respondent
No.1/State.
Mr. A.P. Chaware, Advocate for the Appellant in Appeal 750/2019.
Mr. G.N. Khanzode, Advocate for the Non-applicant/Respondent No.2.
CORAM: AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATED : 23rd JUNE, 2022.
Heard Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel for the
applicant and Mr. Khanzode, learned counsel for the
non-applicant No.2.
2. The Criminal Application (APPA)
No. 616/2021 is for condonation of delay of 892 days in
filing of an appeal challenging the order dated
14.02.2019 below Exhs. 25 and 33 passed by the learned
Sessions Court, whereby the applications for discharge
preferred by the applicant were rejected. He submits,
that the delay was justified, inasmuch as the applicant
2 16.APPA.616-21 WITH APEAL.750-19.odt
had preferred an application under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the First
Information Report, which subsequently came to be
withdrawn on 08.10.2021 and thereafter the present
appeal is filed on 25.10.2021. He further submits, that
there is a justifiable reason for the delay occasioned
which may be condoned.
3. Mr. Khanzode, learned counsel for the
non-applicant No.2 with all vehemence at his command
opposes the application and submits that the reason
advanced is without any merits and even otherwise
considering the language of the second proviso to Section
14-A (3) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short "the Act of
1989"), the Court does not have any power to condone
the delay.
4. In rebuttal, Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel
for the applicant, invites my attention to the judgment of
the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Re
Provision of Section 14(a) of the SC/ST Act vs. Nil
Criminal Writ PIL No. 8/2018 decided on 10.10.2018
and submits that the second proviso to Section 14-A (3)
of the Act of 1989, has been declared as violative of
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and is
consequently struck down, and therefore, the bar upon
the powers of this Court to entertain an appeal after the
period of 180 days no longer survives.
5. Mr. Khanzode, learned counsel for the
3 16.APPA.616-21 WITH APEAL.750-19.odt
non-applicant No.2 submits, that the judgment is not
binding on this Court and would only have a persuasive
value.
6. Learned counsels seek time to address on
this issue, considering which, list the matters on
01.07.2022.
7. Interim order to continue till 01.07.2022.
JUDGE
SD. Bhimte
Signed By:SHRIKANT
DAMODHAR BHIMTE
Signing Date:23.06.2022 17:18
