Mangesh S/O Sahadev Ingle vs The State Of Maharashtra
2024 Latest Caselaw 24364 Bom

Bombay High Court

Mangesh S/O Sahadev Ingle vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 August, 2024

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

2024:BHC-AS:33209



                                                    :1:                             5-IA-2176-24.odt

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2176 OF 2024
                                                 IN
                              CRIMINAL APPEAL [STAMP] NO.11484 OF 2024

                    Mangesh Sahadev Ingle                                    .....Applicant
                               Versus
                    The State of Maharashtra                                 .... Respondent

                                                 -----
                    Mr. Abhinandan B. Vagyani, Advocate (appointed) for the
                    Applicant.
                    Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                                 -----

                                                          CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2024 P.C. :

1. This is an Application for condonation of delay in

filing the Appeal. The Applicant was the original accused

No.2 in POCSO Special Case No.837/2020 before the Special

Judge under POCSO Act, Greater Bombay. The learned trial

Judge, vide her judgment and order dated 4.1.2023,

convicted the Applicant under Section 366(A) of IPC and

under Section 17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual

Offences Act, 2012. There were two other accused in the

1 of 2

Deshmane(PS)

:2: 5-IA-2176-24.odt

case. The major sentence imposed on the Applicant was RI

for twenty years, besides imposition of fine. This Appeal is

filed with the assistance of Legal Services Authority of this

Court.

2. The learned appointed counsel appearing for the

Applicant submitted that the Applicant's relatives had

approached two other private Advocates for filing the

Appeal, but, they did not take any steps. Thereafter, a

request was made to the Legal Services Authority of this

Court. After that learned counsel appearing for the

Applicant today was appointed to represent him and hence

there was delay of 446 days in filing the Appeal.

3. Considering these submissions and in the interest

of justice, the delay in filing the Appeal is condoned. The

Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

2 of 2