1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1037 OF 2009 Kusumbai w/o Kaduba Sawant ... APPLICANT VERSUS Bhausaheb s/o Rjaram Gunjal & ors. .... RESPONDENTS ----- Shri S.B. Ghatole Patil, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.V. Gore,, Advocate for the respondents ----- CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 5th October, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Perused. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant/ appellant has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 58 days in filing the accompanying criminal appeal along with application for leave challenging the order passed below Exh. 1 in S.C.C. No.41/2007, by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Paithan on 28.11.2008. The applicant/ appellant has explained the reasons for the delay 2 in paragraph No.2 of the application. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the present application vehemently and contended that the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of merits and same he dismissed. 4. Considering the contents of the application and more particularly the contents of paragraph No.2 thereof, it appears that delay of 58 days occurred in filing the accompanying criminal appeal does not appear to be willful, deliberate and intentional and hence, same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. Moreover, opportunity is required to be given to the applicant/ appellant to prosecute the accompanying appeal on its own merits. Moreover, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents since they would get opportunity to contest the said appeal if leave is granted. 5. In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) thereof and 58 days delay caused in preferring the accompanying appeal stands condoned. [ SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] fmp/cri1037.09