The State Of Maharashtra v. Mehandi Khaliq Hasan And ANR

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.459 OF 2025 (For condonation of delay) IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO.1816 OF 2025 (For Leave to file an Appeal) The State of Maharashtra .... Applicant versus Mehandi Khaliq Hasan & Anr.

.... Respondents .......

• Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for the State/Applicant. • Mr. Tanveer Patel, Advocate for Respondent No.1. • Ms. Indu Varma, appeared through VC, appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

: SARANG V. KOTWAL & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 27th APRIL, 2026 P.C. :

1.

The present Interim Application is filed for condonation of delay of 271 days caused in filing the Criminal Application for leave to file an Appeal against the Judgment and MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Order dated 24/11/2023 passed by the learned Extra Joint by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.04.30 11:53:56 +0530 District and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel-Raigad, District Raigad, in Special Case (POCSO) No.142/2020. The Nesarikar

2 / 3 Respondents are served in this matter and are appearing through their respective counsel.

2.

Learned APP states that the impugned Judgment and Order was passed on 24/11/2023. The application for certified copy was preferred on 04/12/2023 and it was ready on 23/01/2024. The last date for filing the application was on 12/04/2024. The APP, after scrutiny of the papers, sent the papers to the Law and Judiciary Department, Mantralaya. The Law and Judgment Department, on 26/11/2024 sent papers to the office of Public Prosecutor, High Court, Appellate Side. They were received on 03/12/2024. The present application was ultimately filed on 07/01/2025. The learned APP states that the delay which is caused, is not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentioned above.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 opposed the condonation of delay.

4.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the delay which is caused is not intentional or

3 / 3 deliberate, but is for the reasons mentioned in paragraph Nos.2 and 3 of the application. The offence is serious. In the interest of justice, we proceed to condone the delay caused in filing the application for leave to file an Appeal.

5.

Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) The delay of 271 days caused in filing Criminal Application for leave to file an Appeal is condoned.

(ii) Interim Application is disposed of.

(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)