IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 641 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 641 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 641 OF 2008 IN IN IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3976 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3976 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3976 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant (Orig.Complainant) vs. Manisha Vishnu Mondhe ...Respondent (Orig.Accused) Mr.P.A. Pol, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : DECEMBER 1, 2008 DATED : DECEMBER 1, 2008 DATED : DECEMBER 1, 2008 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned APP for the State. 2. This is an application for condonation of delay of 316 days caused in filing the application for leave to file appeal. 3. The trial court by judgment and order dated 25th June, 2007 was pleased to acquit the accused for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986. In paragraphs 2 and 3 of the application it is stated that an application for certified copy was preferred on 2nd July, 2007 and the copy was delivered on 29th August, 2007. The resolution was passed by the Law and - 2 - Judiciary Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, on 12th August, 2008 granting permission to file appeal though the last date for filing the appeal was 14th November, 2007. No explanation has been given by the Government as to why delay of almost 8 to 9 months was caused in passing the said resolution. Under these circumstances, in my view, no sufficient cause has been shown for the delay caused in filing the application for leave to file appeal. Even otherwise, on perusal of the impugned judgment and order of the trial court, it can be seen that the trial court has observed that no witnesses have been examined by the prosecution to establish that the accused had committed offence punishable under Section 3 of the Act. Even on merits, therefore, no case is made out for grant of leave. 5. Under these circumstances, the application for condonation of delay caused in filing the appeal is rejected. 6. In view of the disposal of the application, the application for leave to file appeal does not survive. - 3 - (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)