1 ndm 44 appr.16.10 anr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION NO. 16 OF 2010 IN REVISION APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 17 OF 2010 WITH REVISION APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 17 OF 2010 Jiten Parmanddas Mody. ... APPLICANT Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. ... RESPONDENTS -------- Mr. Shirish Gupte i/b Bharat Vaishnawa and Company for Applicant. Mr. S.A. Shaikh, APP for State. Mr. Parag Thakare for Respondent No.2 -------- CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 17 th March, 2010. P.C. 1 This is an application for condonation of delay. The application is filed on the ground that the wife of the Applicant had died on 11 th June, 2009 and the Applicant was in a shock as he had lost his wife. It is submitted that it took sometime for the Applicant to come out of the shock and decide to challenge the order passed by the learned 2 Sessions Judge. 2 Mr. Parag Thakare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2 vehemently opposes the application. It is submitted that the Applicant was very much active even after the death of his wife and therefore, the reasons given in the application was not true. 3 No doubt that the Applicant is expected to approach this Court within the prescribed limit. However, If the party makes out a case of “sufficient cause”, the delay can be condoned. While considering the application for condonation of delay, the length of the delay is not material, what is material is as to whether the party makes out a case of “sufficient cause” or not. 4 In the present case, I find that since, the Applicant’s wife had expired and it has specifically been stated that he was in shock due to her demise, the Applicant has made out a case for condoning the delay. In that view of the matter, application is allowed and delay is condoned. Criminal Revision Application be placed for admission on 23 rd March, 2010. [ B.R. GAVAI, J ]