1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3808/2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3852/2009. (M/sMycon Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Prakash Ganapat Thete) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Samir Ahmed Saifuddin Sk., Adv. For applicant; Mr.Ujjwal Patil, Adv. For Respondent. ___ CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATE : 18 th June, 2010. ... 1) Heard learned respective Counsels for the parties. 2) This is an application preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 45 days caused in filing the accompanying criminal application, seeking leave to file an appeal. The applicant submits that he was under bonafide belief that the period of limitation for approaching this Court was of 90 days, but subsequently found that it was of 60 days. Hence, it is submitted that the delay caused in filing the accompanying application, seeking leave to file appeal, is not intentional and same was caused due to bonafide belief of the applicant which was beyond his control. 2 3) The respondent filed affidavit in reply and opposed the present application vehemently. It is submitted by the respondent that ignorance of law is not excuse and, therefore, the reasons put forth by the applicant for condonation of delay, bear no substance. Learned Counsel for the respondent further canvassed that the delay causing in filing the accompanying application for seeking leave to file appeal is not bonafide and same is inordinate and, therefore, the present application deserves to be dismissed. 4) After considering the rival submissions advanced by both the learned respective counsels for the parties, it appears that the applicant was under bonafide belief in respect of limitation to approach to this Court in filing the application, seeking leave to file appeal, which resulted into 45 days delay therein. It also appears that the said delay is not intentional, willful and deliberate and therefore, same deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice, but subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- by the applicant to the respondent. 5) In the result, the present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) thereof and delay of 45 days caused in 3 filing the accompanying application seeking leave to file appeal is condoned subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- by the applicant to the respondent within a period of one week and present application is disposed of accordingly. (SHRIHARI P.DAVARE) JUDGE bdv/p/cran3808.09