The State Of Maharashtra v. Sumit Navinchandra Karodiya And ANR

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2414 OF 2025 (For condonation of delay) IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO.13284 OF 2025 (For Leave to file an Appeal) The State of Maharashtra .... Applicant versus Sumit Navinchandra Karodiya & Anr.

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

• Mr. Ashish Satpute, APP for the State/Applicant. • Mr. Anil G. Lalla a/w Mr. Yash Pulekar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

• Ms. Saswati Deb, appointed Advocate by Legal Aid, for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

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

DATE : 21st APRIL, 2026 P.C. :

1.

The present Interim Application is filed for condonation of delay of 19 days caused in filing the Criminal Application for leave to file an Appeal against the Judgment and MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Order of acquittal dated 04/02/2025 passed by the Additional by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.04.24 12:11:53 +0530 Sessions Judge-4 and Special Judge under POCSO Act, Thane in Nesarikar

2 / 3 Special (P) Case No.234 of 2022. This Court had issued notices to the Respondents. The Respondents are duly served. However, they have not filed their affidavit-in-reply. 2.

Learned APP appearing for the Applicant states that the impugned Judgment and Order was passed on 04/02/2025 and the application for certified copy was preferred on 15/02/2025. It was ready on 15/03/2025. The papers were forwarded to Law and Judiciary Department, requesting for preferring an Appeal. The papers were received from Law and Judiciary Department on 28/04/2025. Thereafter, the present application was filed on 20/06/2025. He submitted that delay thus is not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentions above. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents strongly opposed the application.

4.

After having heard all the parties, we are of the view that the delay which is caused in filing the application, is not intentional but for the reasons mentioned in paragraph Nos.2

3 / 3 and 3 of the Interim Application. We are satisfied that the delay deserves to be condoned.

5.

Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) Interim Application is allowed.

(ii) The delay of 19 days caused in filing the application for leave to file an Appeal is condoned.

(iii) The Interim Application is disposed of.

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