1 Cri.A.3558.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3558 OF 2010 [The State of Maharashtra Vs. Prakash Hari Dhabale and others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Smt.Y.M.Kshirsagar,APP for applicant Shri.A.S.Kadam,Advocate for Resp.No.1to4 .... CORAM: SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATE : 18TH MARCH, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 22 days, caused in filing application seeking leave to file appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the present application and submits that there is no substance in the present application, therefore, same be rejected. 4. Considering the contents of the application and also considering the 2 Cri.A.3558.10 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the applicant has explained the delay satisfactorily. It also appears that the said delay is not willful, deliberate and intentional, and hence, same deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice. 5. In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause [B] thereof, and delay of (22) days, caused in filing accompanying application stands condoned and present application stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- [SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J.] MTK