1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.913 OF 2009 Saishraddha Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., Latur. ... APPLICANT VERSUS Virbhadra s/o Mahadappa Ambegave and another ... RESPONDENTS ----- Shri S.B. Ghute, Advocate for the applicant Shri K.B. Choudhari, A.P.P. for respondent No.2/State Nobody appears for respondent No.1 in spite of service. ----- CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 5th October, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Perused. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant/ appellant to condone the delay of 16 days in filing the accompanying appeal against the order of acquittal dated 30.12.2008, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 2 Latur in S.T.C.C. No.4189/2007. 3. The applicant has set out the reasons for the delay in paragraph No.2 of the present application and considering the said reasons, it appears that the delay of 16 days occurred in filing the accompanying appeal is not intentional, deliberate and willful. Moreover, opportunity is required to be given to the applicant/ appellant to prosecute the accompanying appeal on its own merits and no prejudice will be caused to the respondents since they would get opportunity to contest the said appeal on merits if the leave is granted to the applicant/ appellant. 4. In the circumstances, present application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) thereof and 16 days’ delay caused in filing the accompanying Criminal Appeal stands condoned. [ SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] fmp/cri913.09