ROSHINI MATHEW PULIKKEN v. NARESH ANTHONY GILL AND ANR.
IA/538/2019 · 2026-02-27
Gauri Godse
body2019
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3282 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3282 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
4-IA-538-2019..docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 538 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (PVT.) (ST.) NO. 460 OF 2019 (Leave to Appeal) Roshini Mathew Pulikken. … Applicant Vs. Naresh Anthony Gill and Anr. … Respondents Mr. Bijoy C. h/f. E. A. SASI for the Applicant. Mr. D. J. Haldankar, AGP for the State.
CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.
DATE : 27th February 2026
ORDER :
1. This application is filed for condonation of delay in filing the application seeking leave to file an appeal under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”).
2. The application for leave to file an appeal is filed for seeking leave to challenge the orders passed by the learned magistrate, acquitting the respondent of the offence punishable under Section 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 1/2 Swapnil
4-IA-538-2019..docx
3. The order of acquittal is not passed on any complaint hence, the application under Section 378 (4) is not maintainable.
4. The criminal interim application for condonation of delay and the application for leave to file appeal is therefore dismissed as not maintainable.
5. Applicant is at liberty to adopt appropriate proceedings as permissible in law.
[GAURI GODSE, J.] 2/2