IN Baban Ananta Kamble v. State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr.S.N.Bhosale, Advocate appointed for appellant. Mr.D.S.Mhaispurkar, APP for State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & SMT.R.S.DALVI,JJ. January 09, 2006. P.C. . Heard the learned Advocate appointed for the applicant convicted sentenced learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Baramati offences punishable Sections 302 498-A IPC. The challenged Criminal Appeal no.378 of 2005 but belatedly and hence this application for condonation of delay. . 155 As per the office note the delay caused is of days. The applicant states ignorant limitation period appeal shifted Baramati Sub-jail Yerwada Central Prison. In addition elderly parents and, therefore, there was no one to seek legal 2 advice. . We are satisfied that the delay caused deserves to be condoned and hence the application is allowed. (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
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.