Hassan Ali Pathan @ Mithun vs State Of Maharashtra
2025 Latest Caselaw 3833 Bom

Bombay High Court

Hassan Ali Pathan @ Mithun vs State Of Maharashtra on 22 August, 2025

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

2025:BHC-AS:36200-DB




                                                       1/2                 4-IA-3448-2024 (CR).doc



                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3448 OF 2024
                                                 IN
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL(ST) NO. 16445 OF 2024

                 Hassan Ali Pathan @ Mithun                              ...Applicant
                            Versus
                 State Of Maharashtra                                    ...Respondent

                                                         .......
                 Mr. Pradeepkumar L. Pardeshi a/w Anushka I. Martis a/w Sagar
                 Kasavkar, Advocate for the Appellant/Applicant.
                 Ms. Kranti T. Hiwrale, APP for the State/Respondent.

                                               CORAM     : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                           ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

                                               DATE      : 22th AUGUST 2025

                 P.C. :

                 1.       This Application is filed for condonation of delay of 99 days

                 in filing the present appeal. The Appeal arises from judgment and

                 order dated 22nd February 2024, passed in Session Case No. 309 of

                 2015 by the Sessions Court at Dindoshi. The Applicant has been

                 convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the

                 Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant is in custody since 28 th


             Mayur




                ::: Uploaded on - 22/08/2025                     ::: Downloaded on - 23/08/2025 00:01:56 :::
                                 2/2                   4-IA-3448-2024 (CR).doc


 October 2015.

 2.      Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant

 comes from a humble financial background and was not able to

 engage a private advocate. The Legal Service Authority of this

 Court was directed to appoint an advocate to represent the

 Applicant. This process took sometime. He submits that, the delay

 is neither deliberate nor intentional. If such delay is not condoned,

 it would cause grave prejudice to the applicant.

 3.      The learned APP does not seriously object to the Application.

 4.      In the above circumstances and in the interest of justice, the

 delay of 99 days in filing the Appeal deserves to be condoned by

 passing the following order:-

                                ORDER

I. The Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

II. The Appeal be processed further.

III. The Application is accordingly Disposed of.

(ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)