1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2667 of 2007 (Shakuntalabai Motiram Gahule v. Ramesh Harisa Mahulkar and others) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri O.Y. Kashid, Advocate for Applicant. CORAM : A.H. Joshi, J. DATE : 12th June, 2008 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 166 days caused in filing application for leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal rendered in SCC No.12412 of 1993 on 10-5-2007 by the learned 3rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola. 2. This Court has looked into the merits of the case. It is seen from the discussion contained in the judgment that the Trial Court has disbelieved the version of the witnesses, particularly in the background that the material witnesses were not examined. 3. It is also seen from the judgment that the names of some of the witnesses, who were examined, do not figure in the list of witnesses. Thus this makes the entire story suspicious. The learned Trial Magistrate also held that the offence complained of was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. 4. The view taken by the learned Magistrate is one which is permissible from the facts on record. 5. Once the view is permissible and favourable to the accused is taken and when it is not shown that the evidence on record is not 2 considered, no ground for entertaining an appeal against acquittal is available to the complainant. 6. In the above background, the applicant has no ground for condonation of delay in filing application for leave to appeal. 7. The application is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE pdl