- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4478 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.4478 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.4478 OF 2005 IN IN IN CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4477 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO. 4477 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO. 4477 OF 2005 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court’s Court’s or orders or directions Judge’s orders & Registrar’s orders. ............................................................. Mr.Rajesh More, A.P.P. for State Mr.Yuvraj Chaudhari i/b Vishwanath Talkute for Respondent Nos.1 to 8. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : SEPTEMBER 22,2006. : SEPTEMBER 22,2006. : SEPTEMBER 22,2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned A.P.P. for the Applicant and the learned Advocate for the Respondents. The delay is of 228 days. As directed by this Court by order dated 18th August 2006, additional Affidavit for explaining the delay has been filed by the Applicant. The learned Advocate for the Respondents has strongly opposed this Application by pointing out that there is no sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 2. In view of the averments made in the Application as well as in the additional Affidavit, in my view sufficient explanation for delay of 228 days is - 2 - given. The concerned Additional Public Prosecutor who was entrusted with the work of drafting of this Application was overburdened. Hence, a case is made out for condonation of delay. Delay is accordingly condoned. 3. Place the application for leave to Appeal on board on 16th November 2006. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE