Rajan John Rajmani v. The State Of Maharashtra
3.APPA.910.2019.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.910 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1017 OF 2015 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1017 OF 2015 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.910 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1017 OF 2015 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1680 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1017 OF 2015 Rajan John Rajmani ....Applicant/Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
....Respondents ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1042 OF 2015 Imran Salim Ahmed ....Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1054 OF 2015 Gita Jojeph Montero ....Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent None for the Appellant/Applicant.
Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATE : 19th MARCH, 2021.
Aarti Palkar 1/2 by Aarti G.
Palkar Date: 2021.03.19 16:25:53 +0530 Aarti G.
Palkar
3.APPA.910.2019.doc P.C. :
1.
By an order dated 26.02.2021, the application was adjourned so as to provide one opportunity to the applicant. In Paragraph 2 of our order dated 26.02.2021, a reference is made to the earlier dates. It was the opinion of this Court that though the application was fled in the year 2019, the same could not be heard by this Court due to non-appearance of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant on majority dates. It was also observed by us that in view of non-prosecuting the application for considerable length of time, the application has lost it's efcacy. Though by way of last opportunity the application was adjourned, today also none appears for the applicant, nor any request is made on behalf of the applicant through another counsel for adjournment of the application. 2.
In view of these facts, we are left with no choice, but to reject the application.
3.
The application is accordingly rejected.
( SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) Aarti Palkar 2/2