Bombay High Court
UMESH VISHNU JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
Since the delay in filing the appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate and justice demanded it, the court condoned the 332‑day delay.
Summary
The applicant, convicted under IPC sections 307, 377, 506 and several provisions of the POCSO Act, filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 332‑day delay in preferring his criminal appeal. He argued that financial hardship and his prolonged incarceration prevented him from engaging counsel within the statutory period. The court examined whether the delay was intentional or deliberate and considered the interest of justice. Finding that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, the judges held that justice required condonation. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was allowed and the matter was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 332 days in filing a criminal appeal can be condoned under procedural law.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 307, 377, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 11, 12, 3, 4, 7, 8
Subjects
- condonation of delay
- criminal appeal
- IPC
- POCSO Act
- procedural law
- interest of justice
Judgment
20-IA-2895-2026.odt
rajshree
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2895 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.16521 OF 2026
Umesh Vishnu Jadhav ….Applicant
vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. ....Respondents
Mr.Shailesh Kharat a/w Mr.Onkar Chaudhari for the Applicant.
Ms.Sangeeta Shinde, APP for the State.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ
DATE : 24th AUGUST 2026
P.C. :
1 By way of the present Interim Application, the Applicant
(original accused) seeks condonation of delay of 332 days in
preferring the accompanying Criminal Appeal, which is directed
against the Order and Judgment dated 18/07/2025, interalia
convicting the Applicant for the offences punishable under
Sections 307, 377, 506 of the Indian Penal Code alongwith
Section 3 read with 4,7 read with 8, and 11 read with 12 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).
Digitally signed
RAJSHREE by RAJSHREE
KISHOR KISHOR MORE
MORE Date: 2026.08.25
10:14:06 +0530
1/2
20-IA-2895-2026.odt
2 Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned
APP for the State and perused the Application.
On behalf of the Applicant, it is submitted that due to
financial difficulties the Applicant could not engage an Advocate
for preferring the present Appeal. The Applicant is in Jail for
more than 10 years and hence, the Appeal could not be filed
within the statutory period.
3 The Applicant has made out a case for condonation of delay,
more particularly in Para 5 of the Interim Application. Since the
delay is neither intentional nor deliberate, in the interest of
justice, we condone the delay.
In view of the above, Application for condonation of delay is
allowed and the same is disposed of.
[ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.] [BHARATI DANGRE, J.]
2/2
Checking your session…