{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3180 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO.244 OF 2009 Suryabhan Mahadeo Gutte APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.U.B.Bondar, Advocate for applicant Mr.B.J.Sonawane, APP for the State Mr.P.M.Shinde, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 8 ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 7th December 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to condone the delay of 480 days. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The applicant has annexed a letter dated 24.07.2009 received from the Additional Public Prosecutor, Ambajogai. It is informed by the said letter to the applicant that a proposal was forwarded by the Additional Public Prosecutor, Ambajogai to the Law and Judiciary Department, however, in turn, the Law and Judiciary Department, has informed that this is not a fit case to {2} challenge before the High Court. Considering this aspect it appears that now the State does not want to prefer any appeal against the order of acquittal rendered by the Additional Session Judge and hence the applicant decided to prefer the revision. In the premise, it cannot be said that the delay caused in preferring the Revision is deliberate or intentional. Though the application is opposed by the learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 8 yet the Court is in agreement that the delay is not deliberate or intentional. In the result, the application is allowed. Delay is condoned. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln3180-09