← Library
Bombay High CourtAPL/1555/2024rejected

Appa Ninaji Dambre v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Police Station Akola And Another

2026-01-14Hon'Ble Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke2 pages

1 929 APL 1555.24.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO.1555 OF 2024 [Appa Ninaji Dambre .vs. State of Maharashtra and one] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri V.R. Deshpande, Advocate for Applicant.

Shri M.J. Khan, APP for Non-Applicant No.1/State. Ms. Sunita D. Paul, Advocate for Non-Applicant No.2. ................

CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.

DATED : JANUARY 14, 2026 .

1.

In the present matter, this court observed in order dated 06.01.2026, as under :

1. In the present matter, the learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record the pursis along with copy of Rojnama and details of the pending Special A.C.B. Case No.18/2015. The same is taken on record.

2. From the perusal of the pursis, it is clear that Special A.C.B. Case No.18/2015 was filed on 28.8.2015. After a period of eight years, the prosecution has examined the complainant Balkrishna Sitaramji Ramchaware on 17.1.2023. His examination-in-chief was deferred on 3.2.2023, 27.2.2024 and 20.1.2025. From this, it is clear that for examination of the complainant almost two years period has been taken in the matter.

3. The applicant has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Santosh De .vs. Archna Guha and others, reported in 1994 Supp. (3) SCC 735 and Pankaj Kumar .vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in (2008) 16 SCC 117, wherein it is held that the applicant has a valuable constitutional right to a speedy investigation and

2 929 APL 1555.24.odt trial and if same are unnecessary delayed, then the accused can be given benefit of the same. 2.

In view of above, District Judge-2, Akola is directed to furnish explanation as to why there is delay in conducting Special A.C.B. Case No.18/2015. The said explanation be filed within a period of three weeks.

3.

List this matter after three weeks.

(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) Gulande Signed by: A.S. GULANDE Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 14/01/2026 18:57:34