1 (cr.appln.871/10) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.871 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010 Sanjeev Jagannath Shetty .....Applicant. V/s Ramesh Raju Shetty & Ors. ..... Respondents. Mr. Vishal B. Thadani for the applicant. Mr. N.C. Walimbe for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mrs. P.P. Bhosale, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 19th July, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. Application of the applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution under section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the accused was acquitted on 11/12/2007. Against this order, the applicant preferred revision application in the Sessions Court. The said revision application was dismissed on 29/10/2009. It is submitted that, therefore, the said period when the applicant pursued a wrong remedy 2 (cr.appln.871/10) bonafidely, may be excluded. 3. This application is vehemently opposed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein. He submits that there is delay of about 700 days in filing the present application. 4. In my view, taking into consideration the ground given by the applicant for delay caused in filing the application, the delay deserves to be condoned since the period lost in pursing the wrong remedy will have to be excluded under the provisions of section 14 of the Limitation Act. 5. Application is therefore allowed. Delay in filing the application for leave to file appeal is condoned. Office to number the application for leave to appeal. Stand over for one week. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3 (cr.appln.871/10)