IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 303 OF 2009 IN STAMP NUMBER MAIN NO. 2469 OF 2009 MRS. SUNITA RAMAKANT BORKAR ... Applicant Versus MR. UDAY RATNAKAR KAMAT AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr.S. Shet, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Deep Shirodkar, Advocate for the respondent no.1. Coram:- U. D. SALVI, J. Date:- 10th November, 2009 P.C. Heard. Perused the application and affidavit in support. 2. The delay in preferring an appeal against the order of acquittal of the contesting respondent no.1 Uday Kamat of the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, in criminal case no. 959/OA/138/NIA/07/D passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Vasco-da-gama on 31.3.2009 is sought by the applicant/ complainant Mrs. Sunita Borkar, a senior lecturer in the college of Engineering at Farmagudi, Ponda. The applicant approached this Court with the appeal and delay condonation application on 21.7.2009. She explains the delay in preferring the present appeal with the averments made in the application. 3. The applicant avers that her duty as a senior lecturer tied her up to the business of checking examination papers, process of admission and final examination of her children during the period between 1.4.2009 to 15.5.2009; and as a result there of, she could collect the copy of impugned order from her lawyer on 16.5.2009; She further avers that she could not get in touch with her lawyer at Panaji through whom she wanted to prefer an appeal on 18.5.2009 as the lawyer was out of station enjoying Court vacation; She added that due to the commencement of new academic year both at the college of engineering as well as at the institution where her children were getting education she could not visit the office of the lawyer between 9.6.2009 to 3.7.2009; and later on she could manage to visit the lawyer's office on 4.7.2009, and since then the time was spent in giving instructions to her lawyer and getting the appeal preferred before this Court. All these averments have gone un-rebutted for want of suitable reply. 4. Facts disclosed appear to be sufficient to make accusation of negligence on the part of the applicant Mrs. Sunita Borkar. However a fact cannot be ignored that the applicant is a senior lecturer in the College of Engineering at Ponda, a place away from her residence at Sancoale and not on a way to the Court at Vasco-da-gama. She has also to fulfill her family commitment. As an academic as well as house wife, it is not expected of her to be so particular about the financial or ancillary legal things to the extent a businessmen would be. Lack of diligence on her part therefore needs to be assessed on this factual background. Delay therefore is condoned. Application for delay condonation is allowed. 5. Criminal Miscellaneous application no.303/2009 is therefore allowed. U. D. SALVI, J. vn