..(1).. 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.580 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3226 OF 2007 Hussain Anis Karmalawala. ..Applicant. Versus State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents. ... Mr.Uday P. Warunjikar, Adv. for the Applicant. Mr.S.Shamim, Adv. i/b. Shamim & Co., for Respondent No.1. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP, for the State. ... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 16th April, 2008. DATED : 16th April, 2008. DATED : 16th April, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant-orig.complainant and the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1-orig.accused. 2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned JMFC, Pune acquitting respondent No.1-accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the applicant-orig.complainant filed an application for leave to file appeal against the said judgment ..(2).. and order. As there was delay of 413 days in preferring the said application for leave to file appeal, present application for condonation of delay came to be filed. 3. I have perused the present application and also heard Mr.Warunjikar the learned Counsel for the applicant-orig.complainant. The only reason for the delay is that the papers pertaining to the present matter were kept with the papers in the brief of father of the applicant who had some matters pending before this Court. That is the sole explanation given for the delay of 413 days in filing application for leave to file appeal. In my opinion, the delay is not satisfactorily explained. There is gross delay on the part of the applicant. Hence I am not inclined to condone the delay. Application is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)