Bombay High Court
C.B.I. ACB, MUMBAIversusVIRENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the 179‑day delay was not intentional and was caused by necessary procedural approvals, therefore the delay is condoned.
Summary
The applicant sought condonation of a 179‑day delay in filing an application for leave to appeal against an acquittal dated 31 August 2017, which involved charges under Sections 120‑B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(1)(d) with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Respondent No. 1 had died, and the court recorded the death certificate, abating the application as to that party. The applicant explained that the delay resulted from the time taken to obtain approvals from senior CBI officers, the Ministry of Law and Justice, and other procedural steps, not from any intentional neglect. The respondents were served but did not appear, and the court found no intentional delay. Accepting the explanation, the court condoned the delay and ordered that the leave‑to‑appeal application be processed further.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 179 days in filing an application for leave to appeal can be condoned.
- Whether the explanation provided for the delay, involving procedural approvals, constitutes sufficient cause.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Prevention of Corruption Act — s. 13(1)(d), 13(2)
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- leave to appeal
- acquittal
- IPC sections
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- death of party
- criminal procedure
Judgment
1 of 4 29-IA-261-2019
Sagar Magar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ST) NO. 191 OF 2019
(FOR LEAVE TO FILE APPEAL)
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 261 OF 2019
C.B.I. Acb, Mumbai … Applicant
Versus
Virendra Kumar Srivastava And Ors. ... Respondents
__________
Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w Mr. Sumitkumar Nimbalkar a/w Mr. Anay
Joshi a/w Ms. Yukta Sawant a/w Mr. Bilal Ansari for Applicant.
Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for the Respondent-State.
None for the Respondents.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
DATE : 31 AUGUST 2026
PC :
1) Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the
Respondent No. 1 has passed away. He tendered copies of the
relevant documents, including the death certificate. They are taken
on record and marked ‘X’ collectively. Therefore, this application
stands abated as far as Respondent No. 1 is concerned.
Digitally signed
by SAGAR
SAGAR SANTOSH
MAGAR
SANTOSH Date:
MAGAR 2026.09.01
13:15:23
+0530
2 of 4 29-IA-261-2019
2) The report shows that notice is duly served on
Respondent No. 2. Appearance is filed by Advocate Mangesh Patel
for Respondent No. 3. Vide Order dated 2nd July 2026, it is noted
that Ms. Padmavati Vaishya had appeared for Respondent No. 2.
Till today, she had not filed her Vakalatnama and reply. Therefore,
we have heard the learned counsel for the Applicant.
3) This is an application for condonation of delay of 179
days in preferring an application for leave to file an appeal against
acquittal. The Applicant seeks to challenge the Judgment and
Order dated 31st August 2017 passed by the learned Special Judge
(CBI), City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, in Special Case
No. 30 of 2007, acquitting the Respondents from the charges of
offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471
of the IPC. Respondent No. 1 has also been acquitted under
Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act.
4) It is mentioned in the Application and submitted by the
learned counsel for the Applicant that the application for a
3 of 4 29-IA-261-2019
certified copy was made on 1st September 2018. The same was
ready on 25th September 2018 and delivered on 28th September
2018. Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor and Senior Public
Prosecutor gave their comments. Approval of S.P., HOB, HOZ and
DLA was sought. They are the Senior Officers of CBI, Mumbai. The
approval was granted on 4th December 2018. After that, the
procedure was followed. The Assistant Legal Advisor, Ministry of
Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, granted approval on
22nd February 2019. The file was forwarded to CBI, ACB, Mumbai,
on 15th March 2019, and finally, the application was filed. Thus,
causing a delay of 179 days in filing the application.
5) The Respondents, though served, have not appeared.
We find the explanation given in the application is acceptable.
There is no intentional delay.
6) Hence the following Orders:-
i) The delay of 179 days in filing the
application for leave to file an appeal against the
Judgment and Order dated 31st August 2018
4 of 4 29-IA-261-2019
passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), City
Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, in
Special Case No. 30 of 2007 is condoned.
ii) The application for leave to appeal shall be
processed further.
(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Checking your session…