Parmeshwar Narayan Dake vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 2250 Bom

                                       {1}
                                                                          36 sr.no..odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

            36 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.683 OF 2022
 IN APPEAL ST/1782/2022 WITH APPLICATION/684/2022 IN APPEAL
                        ST/1782/2022

                       PARMESHWAR NARAYAN DAKE
                                   VERSUS
                       THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                       ...
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ravindra M. Deshmukh
                      APP for Respondents: Mr. K.S. Patil

                                CORAM : V.K. JADHAV AND
                                        SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

DATE : 7TH MARCH, 2022.

PER COURT:

1]              Heard.
2]              Issue notice to respondent - State.

Learned APP waives notice for respondent State. 3] The applicant is the convict in Sessions Case No. 189 of 2011. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded vide judgment and order of conviction, convicted the applicant accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302, 304B r/w. 34 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default, to suffer R.I. for six months.

4] There is inordinate delay of 2855 days in filing the appeal against the said judgment and order of conviction. 5] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the year 2017, the applicant had requested the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad to file an appeal and accordingly, the Sub-

{2} 36 sr.no..odt

Committee has appointed one counsel. However, unfortunately the said counsel died and thus, the appeal could not be preferred. Learned counsel submits that, therefore, the delay though inordinate in nature has been occurred.

6] Learned APP submits that appropriate orders may be passed. 7] It appears that the applicant was under-trial prisoner in connection with Sessions Case No. 189 of 2011. The applicant has allegedly committed murder of his wife. Thus, considering the reasons for the delay as elaborated in Para. No.9 of the application, we are inclined to condone the delay.

8] In view of the same and for the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (C) .

Criminal application is accordingly disposed of.

        [SANDIPKUKAR C. MORE]                         [V.K. JADHAV]
             JUDGE                                       JUDGE.

grt/-