(-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. 5165 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5165 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5165 OF 2005 IN IN IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2002 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2002 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2002 Ankur Arora ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr ...Respondents ..... Mr. A.M. Sarogi, Advocate for Applicant Mr.M.S.Mohite, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr. Y.S. Shinde, A.P.P. for State. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATED: 24TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 24TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 24TH AUGUST, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant, the learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned advocate for the respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant. 2. Office has raised objection that there was delay of three years and 54 days in filing Criminal Appeal No.63 of 2002. The order impugned in the said appeal is dated 8.11.2001 and the appeal has been admittedly filed on 22.1.2002. In this view of the matter, it is seen that though there is delay of few days in filing the appeal the said delay is certainly not of (-2-) three years and 54 days. 3. Looking to the fact and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that sufficient cause has been made for condonation of delay caused in filing Criminal Appeal No.63 of 2002, hence, delay is condoned. 4. Application is disposed of. *****