MIRABAI Vs. ASHOK BHAURAO PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for condonation of delay for filing an application for leave to appeal against an order of acquittal for an offence punishable under section 494 read with section 109 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to this application are as under :

(3.) Her contention in the application is that she could not file the application for leave to file an appeal within time because her local Advocate advised her that such an application could be filed within 90 days. Mr. Karia, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of opponent Nos. 1 to 13 (original accused persons), submits that the delay cannot be condoned on a specious ground that it was caused on account of wrong advice given by an Advocate. Mr. Karia relied upon a ruling of Goa, Daman and Diu Court in the case of (Pandurang B.P. Malkarnekar v. Government of Goa, Daman and Diu) A.I.R. 1978 Goa, Daman and Dui, 22 to substantiate his contention. He further submits that the application has not mentioned the name of the Advocate who gave her wrong advise nor does she give any particulars as to when she had approached the said Advocate. Mr. Karia also urged that the applicant failed to mention whether her Advocate was a junior Advocate or a senior Advocate and on such facts and circumstances the application for condonation of delay be rejected.