STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PANDIT GANPAT TARE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is filed for setting aside the conditional order dated 16th April 2002 and for restoring criminal appeal on file and to permit the applicant-State to file application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. This matter and many other such matters bring to fore the callousness and irresponsible way in which the office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bombay is functioning.

(2.) AGAINST the judgment and order dated 28/09/2001 delivered by IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No. 177 of 2001 acquitting three accused persons of the offence of murder under Section 302 of IPC, the State had presented appeal in this Court belatedly without filing even the application for condonation of delay which is required under law. The memo of the appeal is undated. From the proceeding we are unable to know the date on which this appeal came to be filed. Only thing we know from the proceeding is that there was delay of about 58 days in filing this appeal. When the office put up the matter for orders for not removing the objections, the note mentioned that there was delay of 58 days in filing this appeal. Anyway as the said objection was not removed in spite of the fact that the matter must have been notified for removal of the objections as per the practice followed by the office of the Criminal Department, High Court, Bombay, the appeal came to bepalced before the Division Bench for orders on 16th April 2002. On the said date the Division Bench (Coram : G. D. Patil and D. B. Bhosale, JJ.) passed the following order :

(3.) THE office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bombay woke-up from its deep slumber as late as 29th August, 2002 when an application for setting aside the order of dismissal was made. The said application is affirmed by one S. V. Patil, Supervisory Senior Clerk, Criminal Branch in the office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bombay, what is more astonishing and flabeergasting is that the said application, which is verified on solemn affirmation, contains incorrect and wrong averments. In para 3 of the said application it is stated that "on 16-4-2002 the appeal was notified for orders before the Hon'ble Justice V. K. Tahilramani and 8 weeks time was granted conditionally to file the Criminal Application for condonation of delay". No conduct on the part of the Law Officer could be more irresponsible and wrong statements in the application which has been verified on solemn affirmation. The conditional order was passed by the Division Bench of this Court consisting of Justice G. D. Patil and Justice D. B. Bhosale and not by Justice V. K. Tahilramani as stated in the application. Next, the conditional order was passed giving three weeks time to file application for condonation of delay and not 8 weeks time as stated wrongly. The three weeks time from 16-4-2002 can never by any calculation expire on 11th June, 2002, as stated in paragraph 3 of this application. The said application also mentions that Criminal Application No. 2609 of 2002 was filed on 24-7-2002 for condonation of delay.