1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1980 OF 2008 Mr.Abdul Latif s/o Abdul Rauf ...Applicant VERSUS Mrs.Rijwana Afrin w/o Abdul Latif & anr. ...Respondents ..... Shri U.P.Pathan, advocate holding for Shri T.W.Pathan, advocate for the applicant Shri A.G.Ansari, advocate for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 28 th JULY, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 1 Perused. 2 2 The applicant (original complainant) has preferred the present application for condonation of delay of 3 days in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Application challenging the correctness and legality of the judgment and order passed in application E-334 of 2006 by the Family Court, Aurangabad on 6.3.2008. The delay is due to the reasons mentioned in the present application, more particularly in para no.13 thereof. 3 The applicant submits that the said delay is not willful, deliberate and intentional and, therefore, submitted that the same be condoned in the interest of justice. 4 The learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the present application and submitted that the present application bears no substance and is devoid of any merits and same be rejected. 5 Heard learned respective counsel for the parties. 6 Considering the rival submissions and reasons put forth by the applicant for delay of 3 days in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Application, particularly in para 13 of the present application that he is native of Madhya Pradesh and 3 resident of Barhanpur, in Khandava District and was not able to communicate to the advocate at Aurangabad,which resulted in to delay of 3 days in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Application, appear to be sufficient ground for condoning the said delay of 47 days caused in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Application. Moreover, the said delay caused in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Application does not appear to be willful, deliberate and intentional, as well as the same is not inordinate, and hence, the same is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. Moreover, the applicant is required to be given an opportunity to prosecute the accompanying Criminal Revision Application on merits and, therefore also, Criminal Application is required to be allowed. 7 In the result, the present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and 3 days delay caused in preferring the accompanying Criminal Revision Application stands condoned and the accompanying Criminal Revision Application be registered, numbered and fixed for admission in due course. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/crap1980.08