The State Of Maharashtra And Others v. Dilip Sakharama Danekar And Another

2024:BHC-AUG:13328-DB Cri.Appln. No.2663/2024 :: 1 ::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2663 OF 2024 The State of Maharashtra & ors.

... APPLICANTS

VERSUS

Dilip Sakharama Danekar & anr.

... RESPONDENTS .......

Mr. A.R. Kale, A.P.P. for applicants Mr. A.L. Kanade, Advocate for respondents .......

CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

DATE : 5th JULY, 2024 O R D E R :

Heard. This is an application by the State for extension of time.

2.

This Court passed following order on 26/3/2024 in Criminal Writ Petition No.304/2024 :- "We dispose of the criminal writ petition by directing the State Government/ the respondent No.1- Principal Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai to take appropriate decision on the grievance being made by the petitioners on the basis of report of the CID and in the light of opinion expressed by the learned

Cri.Appln. No.2663/2024 :: 2 ::

Advocate General, as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of eight (08) weeks from today. The decision to be taken shall be communicated to the petitioners."

3.

In the application, following reasons are given for not deciding the application within stipulated time :- "As per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court the State authorities to decide the proposal in 8 weeks has been expired on 26/05/2024. As there were election program and code of conduct, the decision could not be taken. At the same time, there were summer vacation going on and even application for extension of time could not be filed immediately or before the expiry of time. Therefore, now by way of present application, applicants are seeking condonation of period from 26th May, 2024 till filing this application and for extension of time."

4.

Learned Advocate for the original petitioners is present. He submits that, already eight weeks time was granted, therefore, further extension may not be granted. 5.

In view of the reasons given in the application, we allow the application in terms of prayer clause (B). (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) (R.G. AVACHAT, J.) fmp/-