Sapana Abhijeet Sen And ANR v. U. T. Of Dadra And Nagar Haveli And ANR.
1 / 2 08-IA-3095-24-IN -APEAL-ST-15618-24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3095 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.15618 OF 2024 Sapana Abhijeet Sen & Anr.
.... Applicants versus U. T. of Dadra & Nagar Haveli & Anr.
.... Respondents .......
• Mr. Vinay J. Bhanushali, Advocate for Applicants. • Ms. Amisha Salvi i/b. H. S. Venegaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
• Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM
: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 13th AUGUST, 2024 P.C. :
1.
The Applicants were the original accused Nos.2 and 3 in Sessions Case No.16/2018 before the Sessions Judge, Dadra & Nagar Haveli at Silvassa. At the conclusion of the trial, the Applicants along with the other co-accused were convicted for commission of offence punishable u/s 395 r/w 324 of the Indian Penal Code. The major sentence imposed on them was rigorous imprisonment for 5 years besides imposition of fine. 2.
Heard Mr. Vinay J. Bhanushali, learned counsel for the Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date:
2024.08.17 11:48:05 +0530 Applicants, Ms. Amisha Salvi, learned counsel for the Respondent MANUSHREE NESARIKAR No.1 and Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, learned APP for the State. Nesarikar
2 / 2 08-IA-3095-24-IN -APEAL-ST-15618-24.odt 3.
This is an application for condonation of delay of 74 days in preferring the Appeal. Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that the Applicants are poor ladies. They were not in good financial condition. They have filed his Appeal though the legal aid. Some time was required to collect the necessary documents and therefore there is delay of 74 days in preferring the Appeal.
4.
Learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 submitted that this is not a sufficient ground for condoning the delay. 5.
I have considered these submissions. In the interest of justice and considering submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicants, the delay of 74 days in preferring the Appeal is condoned.
6.
The Appeal be processed further.
7.
The application is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)