1 MNM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.350 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (ST)NO.423 OF 2009 Irshad Ahmed Shaikh Abdul Jeelani ...Applicant Vs. Nasruddin Subhan Ali & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.J.B.Kocheta, Advocate for the Applicant Mrs. Neeta Jain, Advocate for Respondents 1 to 3 Mrs. A.A. Mane, A.P.P for the State CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 27TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1.This application is for condonation of delay of 6 years and 276 days. The incident took place on 9 th December 1995. The complaint was filed on 10 th December 1995. After the charge-sheet came to be filed the applicant herein was summoned and failed to appear in 2002. The accused have been acquitted as charge was not framed on 24 th June 2002. 2.The charge in this case is under Sections 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. Evidence of what 2 transpired in 1995 would be required to be recorded. It would be impractical to bring the prosecution to fruition. Under these circumstances the summons issued upon the complainant is to be seen. 3.The summons is sought to be served at his address which was with the police. The report shows that his premises was demolished. The applicant has produced a xerox copy of the letter of MHADA to show that the premises was not demolished. That letter per se cannot be used. The truth of the contents of that letter would have to be seen. The applicant has also produced copies of other documents such as electricity bill and bank pass book. These documents do not show continuous possession. The electricity bill would continue to be issued even after the premises is demolished. The bank statement would continue to be sent at the address with the Bank even after the premises is demolished. Hence, the report of the police cannot be faulted. 4.The learned Judge has passed his order upon the report of the police and seen that summons could not be served upon the applicant. 5.It is the complainant s case that the accused abused his sister and an altercation took place. In the interest of justice, though delay cannot be condoned 3 and as the accused are represented by their Advocate the accused are specifically directed not to have any altercation with the complainant or abuse the complainant, his sister or her other family members or intimidate them in future. Delay, however, cannot be condoned. 6.The application is rejected. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)