Vaijnath Kacharu Bansode v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Hence Application is allowed and the delay is condoned
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 302
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Hence Application is allowed and the delay is condoned. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL ST. NO.4 OF 2011 Vaijnath Kacharu Bansode ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mrs. A.S. Pai, APP for Respondent State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED: 13th January, 2011 P.C. This is an application received from the jail where the applicant is undergoing sentence. He has been convicted and sentenced for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C., in Sessions Case No.219 of 2008 and, therefore, he seeks leave to challenge the said order by filing Criminal Appeal Stamp No.4 of 2011. However, the appeal is filed beyond 2 cri-appln.5-11 the time by 24 days and hence this application for condonation of delay.
Affidavit in support of the application is dispensed with and we are satisfied that the delay so caused deserves to be condoned.
Operative part
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence Application is allowed and the delay is condoned
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 13 Jan 2011. The bench was U D SALVI, B H MARLAPALLE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.