1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. APPA 122/2011 IN Criminal Appeal No. /2011 (Sushila Pandhari Bele V/s. Bhaskar Govindrao Waghmare and another) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. A. S. Killedar, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. P. A. Deshmukh, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 Mr. M. A. Kadu, A.P.P. for the Respondent No. 2 CORAM : U. V. BAKRE, J. DATE : 26/08/2011 1. Heard Mr. A. S. Killedar, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. P. A. Deshmukh, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 and Mr. M. A. Kadu, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No. 2. 2. It is the contention of learned Advocate Mr. A. S. Killedar that the applicant is old lady of 60 years age and, that she was expecting that State would file the appeal and had even contacted the Prosecutor who had assured him that he would write to the Law and Judiciary Department recommending, that Appeal should be preferred. The State has not filed any appeal. 2 3. The applicant is a patient of Lumbar Spondylosis and Ischemic Heart disease. She has produced a medical certificate of Dr. M. N. Lanje certifying the said sickness and she was under his treatment from 01/10/2010 to 17/02/2011. 4. Learned Advocate Mr. P. A. Deshmukh has mainly objected to the maintainability of the appeal by contending that the applicant is not a victim and has no locus-standi to file the appeal. The objection to the grounds for condonation of delay appear to be casual. 5. In my view the point of maintainability of the appeal need not be considered in the present application and the said point can be kept open. 6. Delay is condoned subject to cost of Rs. 500/- to be paid to the respondent no. 1. 7. The point of maintainability of the appeal is however kept open. JUDGE Punde