1 483.11-apl-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 483 OF 2011 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 484 OF 2011 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 485 OF 2011 Mr.Azam Khan. ... Applicant. V/s. States of Maharashtra and another. ... Respondents. S.V.Marwadi i/b. S.P.Narkar for the applicant. H.J.Dhedia, D.P.More and Ms.A.T.Jhaveri, APPs for the State. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J. DATED : 25th July 2011. P.C. : By these applications, the applicants are challenging the concurrent orders, one passed by the trial Court thereby condoning delay and other passed by the revision Court thereby dismissing the revision. 2. Mr.Marwadi, learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the reason sought to be given for condonation of delay was false, as such, the delay ought not to have been condoned by the trial Court. 3. Firstly, these applications arise out of purely interlocutory order. Apart from that the trial Court has given sufficient reasons for condoning the delay and the revisional Court has also given reasons for dismissing the revision. No case is made out for interference with the impugned order. All the three applications are, therefore, dismissed. (B.R.GAVAI, J.)