1 7.apln.3933-09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3933 OF 2009 Central Bureau of Investigation. ..Applicant. Versus Narpatsingh Ranchodbhai Patel & Others. ..Respondents. .......... Ms.P.H. Kantharia, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.Gautam Tiwari, Advocate i/b. Mr.Subhash Jadhav, Advocate for the Respondents. Ms.S.V. Gajare., A.P.P. for the State. .......... CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 25th JANUARY, 2011. P.C. 1. By this application, it is prayed that the delay of about 254 days be condoned. Notice was issued to the Respondents. After several adjournments replies have been filed by the Respondents. When the Application came up for hearing on 18.1.2011, the Counsel appearing for the Applicant proceeded on the basis that no reply has been filed. However, when made aware about the replies, she complained that copies of the said replies were not served on her before filing in the Registry. Accordingly, we directed the Counsel appearing for the Respondents to furnish copies of the reply affidavits to the Counsel for PPD 2 7.apln.3933-09 the Applicant forthwith. Copies of the affidavits, however, have been made available to the learned Counsel for the Applicant only this morning in Court. 2. Considering the above, we would proceed with the Application on the assumption that the reply affidavits filed by the Respondents have not been placed on record as copies thereof were not served on the Counsel for the Applicant. The other option is to proceed on the basis of denial. When called upon, the Counsel for Respondents submit that the delay has not been properly explained and infact the explanation offered is not sufficient cause. On going through the Application, however, we find that the delay has been caused due to unavoidable circumstances and multiple departments involved in decision making after the recommendation is made by the Public Prosecutor for filing of the Appeal against acquittal. 3. In the interest of justice and considering the serious charges for which the respondents were tried coupled with the fact that the explanation offered in our opinion is a sufficient cause, the Application will have to be made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Counsel for the respondents, however, submits that the Court below has already acquitted the Respondents for the reasons recorded in the impugned 3 7.apln.3933-09 decision and no sufficient ground has been made out in the Appeal. That however is a matter to be considered in Appeal. Accordingly, Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Criminal Application for leave to file appeal be registered and place for admission on 7th February, 2011. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)