Bombay High Court
State Of Maharashtra Through Range ... vs Shri. Kartikswami Maharaj And Others. on 7 November, 2025
Order 0711appa606.25
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APPA] NO. 606 OF 2025.
State of Maharashtra
-VERSUS-
Shri Kartikswami Maharaj and others.
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Shri G.S. Umale, A.P.P. for the Appellant.
Shri R.P. Joshi, Advocate for Respondents.
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : NOVEMBER 07, 2025.
Heard Shri Umale, learned A.P.P. for the appellant State and
Shri Joshi, learned Counsel for the Respondent/accused.
2. Leave granted to correct, so far as the number of days of delay
is concerned. It appears that there is delay of 210 days, however, in the
application, the same is mentioned as 102 days. Necessary correction be
carried out forthwith.
3. The present application is filed seeking to condone delay of
210 days caused in preferring the appeal.
3. This matter is having a checkered history. A complaint was
filed by the Forest Department in the year 2002, however, judgment was
Rgd.
Order 0711appa606.25
2
delivered in the year 2012, holding that the accused are not guilty and
accordingly all of them came to be acquitted. Against this judgment of
acquittal, the appellant Forest Department filed Criminal Appeal
No.51/2017 along with an application for condonation of delay. The
delay was condoned and Criminal Appeal No.51/2017 was heard. The
said Appeal came to be decided on 18.10.2021, and it was ordered that
the appeal memo be returned to the appellant for presenting the same
before the appropriate Court as per law. In other words, it was held that
the appeal is not maintainable, therefore, the appeal was returned to the
appellant.
4. Against this order dated 18.10.2021, the Forest Department
filed Criminal Writ Petition No.655/2022 before this Court and this
Court vide order dated 28.04.2023, confirmed the order passed on
28.04.2021. However, this Court observed that "the State can avail the
liberty reserved/granted by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated
18.10.2021". Thereafter, the present application along with the appeal
came to be filed by the Forest Department challenging the judgment and
order dated 27.07.2012.
5. The learned A.P.P. submits that considering the checkered
history, the delay is required to be condoned and the appeal be heard on
merits. He further submits that there was delay of 210 days in preferring
the appeal. He has invited my attention to the contents of the application,
Rgd.
Order 0711appa606.25
3
which narrates the entire history of the litigation. He further submits that
after the dismissal of the Criminal Writ Petition, the Forest Department
has sought legal opinion and after receiving the same, as well as the
permission from the Law and Judiciary Department, present appeal along
with the application for condonation of delay is filed.
6. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondent
has vehemently submitted that is is for the State to explain the delay in a
proper manner. He further submits that there are no reasons mentioned
in the application, and therefore, there is no sufficient cause shown in the
application for condonation of delay. He has invited my attention to the
findings recorded by the learned Trial Court, and has accordingly prayed
to reject the application for condonation of delay.
7. Upon hearing the parties, it appears that the complaint is filed
in the year 2002, whereas the judgment is delivered in the year 2012.
Thereafter, it further appears that the Appeal No.51/2017, was filed along
with an application for condonation of delay. The delay was condoned,
and accordingly the appeal came to be registered and heard. The
respondent has raised a preliminary objection in respect of maintainability
of the appeal and accordingly after hearing, by judgment and order dated
18.10.2021 the Appellate Court held that the appeal was not
maintainable, and therefore, the appeal memo was returned to the
department, against which order, the department has preferred Writ
Rgd.
Order 0711appa606.25
4
Petition No.655/2022, wherein the order passed by the Sessions Judge
dated 18.10.2021 was confirmed and Writ Petition was accordingly
dismissed. However, liberty was granted to the appellant as stated above.
8. Considering this checkered history and the reasons set out in
paragraph nos.3,4, 10 and 11, by which the department has tendered an
explanation for delay, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 210
days in filing Criminal Appeal, since I am satisfied that the delay is not
intentional or deliberate. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
[i] Criminal Application No.606/2025 is allowed and disposed
of. The delay of 210 days in filing appeal is hereby condoned. Office to
register the application for leave.
.......
Criminal Application (Leave) /2025.
Heard.
2. Issue notice to the non-applicants, returnable on 14.11.2025.
Learned Counsel appearing for the non-applicants (excluding dead non-
applicants) waive notice.
JUDGE
Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD)
Designation:Rgd.
PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 10/11/2025 15:04:22
