Bombay High Court
MAHENDRA SITARAM BARELAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The Court condoned the 86‑day delay and allowed the appeal to be registered.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal appeal against Mahendra Sitram Barela. The appeal was filed 86 days after the prescribed period, prompting a petition for condonation of delay. The Court examined whether the delay could be excused under procedural law. It held that the 86‑day delay was condonable and ordered the appeal to be registered after removal of any office objections. The application for condonation was disposed of, and the matter was adjourned for further hearing.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 86 days in filing a criminal appeal can be condoned
Subjects
- criminal appeal
- condonation of delay
- procedural law
- confirmation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:45800-DB
1.2026CONFIRMATION
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
944 CRIMINAL CONFIRMATION CASE NO. 1 OF 2026
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
VERSUS
MAHENDRA SITRAM BARELA
...
APP for the Petitioner : Mr. G.A. Kulkarni
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Jadhav Satej S. (appointed)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3981 OF 2026
IN APEALST/10794/2026
MAHENDRA SITARAM BARELA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jadhav Satej S
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. G.A. Kulkarni
...
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.
DATE : 30.09.2026
P.C. :
1. Heard.
2. For the reasons stated in Criminal Application
No.3981 of 2026, delay of 86 days in filing the present
Criminal Appeal stands condoned. Application stands
disposed of.
3. Appeal be registered, after removal of office
objections, if any.
4. Stand over to 14.10.2026.
[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE]
JUDGE JUDGE
sga
Checking your session…