1 appa 837.25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 837 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO. 8406 OF 2025 ( Ashish Naresh Mule ..vs.. The State of Maharashtra, through PS Pulgaon ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. K.G. Rathi, Counsel for the applicant/appellant, Mr. S.S. Hulke, Addl.P.P. for the respondent/State. CORAM : NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J. DATE : 13-10-2025 The applicant/appellant has assailed the judgment and order dated 04-05-2024 passedby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special (POCSO) Case No. 37/2023, convicting the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354-A(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act. 2. The applicant submits that there is a delay of 449 days in filing the appeal, which need to be condoned on the ground that the applicant is behind the bars and no one was in his family to help him to take legal steps available in law. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that therefore, he was not in a position to prefer the appeal within the prescribed time. It was only after the appointment of the counsel, the appeal is filed before this Court. 2 appa 837.25 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the said application contending that no sufficient grounds are demonstrated in the application to condone the delay. 4. Upon considering the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Public Prosecution for the respondent/State and the reasons stated in the application, this Court is of the view that sufficient cause has been demonstrated for delay in filing the appeal. The reasons assigned by the applicant appear to be satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, the delay of 449 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the application is allowed. The appeal be registered. Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No. 8406/2025. Heard. 2. Admit. 3. Call for record and proceedings. 4. Mr. S.S. Hulke, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice for the respondent/State. (NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.) adgokar