IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1130 OF 2006 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1041 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Vs. Daryappa G.Raut and ors. ..Respondents. Mrs.P.H.Kantharia,APP. for the State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED :20TH FEBRUARY, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Mrs. Kantharia, the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The State has filed Criminal Appeal No.1041 of 2006 for enhancement of sentence awarded in Sessions Case No.85 of 2003 but the said appeal is beyond time of 53-days. Hence, this application for condonation of delay. 3. We are satisfied that the delay caused deserves to be condoned. The application is therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.) IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1041 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Vs. Daryappa G.Raut and ors. ..Respondents. Mrs.P.H.Kantharia,APP. for the State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED :20TH FEBRUARY, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Mrs. Kantharia, the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. We have perused the reasonings set out in the order of conviction and we are satisfied that there is no case made out for enhancement of the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. 3. Hence, appeal is dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.) IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.757 OF 2006 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3863 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Vs. Daryappa G.Raut and ors. ..Respondents. Mrs.P.H.Kantharia,APP. for the State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED :20TH FEBRUARY, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Mrs. Kantharia, the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The State has filed Criminal Appeal No.3863 of 2006 seeking leave to file appeal under Section-378(3)) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order of acquittal passed by the learned 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge at Pandharpur for offences under Sections-147,148,307 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code but the said application is beyond time of 23 days and hence, this application for condonation of delay. 3. We are satisfied that the delay deserves to be condoned. Hence, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.) IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3863 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant. Vs. Daryappa G.Raut and ors. ..Respondents. Mrs.P.H.Kantharia,APP. for the State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED :20TH FEBRUARY, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Mrs. Kantharia, the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Call for record and proceeding. 3. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable after eight weeks. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.)