{"id":363680,"date":"2025-10-14T09:30:14","date_gmt":"2025-10-14T04:00:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=363680"},"modified":"2025-10-17T09:29:33","modified_gmt":"2025-10-17T03:59:33","slug":"bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/","title":{"rendered":"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> The instant interim application was filed by the applicant (accused) for condonation of delay in filing the appeal for grant of bail. A Single Judge Bench of S.M Modak, J.<\/span>, held that as the delay was for 118 days which was less than 180 days as per the proviso of Section 14(3)<\/a> of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989<\/a> (‘SC & ST Act’) and the ground of apprehension of the applicant of delay in the trail constituted sufficient cause for its condonation. Therefore, the Court allowed the interim application by condoning the delay in filing the appeal.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The applicant, an undertrial prisoner, along with other co-accused persons was facing trial for commission of an offence under Sections 302<\/a>, 143<\/a>, 147<\/a>, 149<\/a>, 506<\/a>, 109<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and under Sections 3(2)(v)<\/a> and 6<\/a> of the SC & ST Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

After the trial started, 17 prosecution witnesses were examined and during its pendency, the co-accused applied for recalling some of the prosecution witnesses and even after the transfer of the earlier presiding officer, no new presiding officer was posted there and so, the trial slowed down. Therefore, the appellant applied for regular bail before the Sessions Court but the same was rejected.Aggrieved by the same, the appellant with a delay of 118 days, filed an appeal before the present Court for the condonation of delay.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court referred to the two proviso of Section 14(3)<\/a> of the SC & ST Act<\/a> which stated that an appeal could be entertained after the expiry of ninety days on satisfaction about sufficient cause while as per the second proviso, no appeal could be entertained after the expiry of the period of one hundred and eighty days. Thus, a delay of more than 90 days but less than 180 days could be condoned by the Court if there was sufficient cause to explain the delay.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that in criminal jurisprudence, the right of speedy trial was recognised as a fundamental right and just because the applicant had participated in the trial at one stage, at other stage it did not lose a right to ask for bail. The principles of trial of suit about waiver\/res judicata could not be applied in such contingency. Furthermore, the Court observed that in the instant case the applicant had participated in the trial, but the circumstances caused apprehension in the mind of the applicant that the trial would be delayed, which constituted sufficient cause for condonation of delay.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court opined that the delay was for 118 days, which was within the prescribed time of 180 days as per the SC & ST Act. Therefore, the Court allowed the interim application by condoning the delay in filing the appeal.<\/p>\n

[Amit Kailas Varghade v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 3843<\/a>, decided on: 8-10-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Advocate for the Applicant-<\/span> Pushpa Ganediwala, Aniket B. Rathod, Anshu Agrawal, Pradyumna Agrawal, Advocates<\/p>\n

Advocate for the Respondents-<\/span> Ashok S. Gawai, APP; Jai Kanade, Prachiti Naik, Advocates<\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“In criminal jurisprudence, the right of speedy trial is recognised as a fundamental right and just because the accused had participated in the trial at one stage, at other stage he does not lose a right to ask for bail.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":363687,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[90820,2569,2552,13961,78254,36335,29912,90821],"class_list":["post-363680","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-apprehension-for-delay-in-trial","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-Condonation_of_delay","tag-ipc","tag-justice-s-m-modak","tag-penal-code-1860","tag-sc-st-act","tag-sufficient-cause-for-delay-condonation"],"yoast_head":"\nBHC:Apprehension of delay sufficient for filing condonation|SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-10-14T04:00:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-10-17T03:59:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/\",\"name\":\"BHC:Apprehension of delay sufficient for filing condonation|SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-10-14T04:00:14+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-10-17T03:59:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"delay sufficient for filing condonation\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"BHC:Apprehension of delay sufficient for filing condonation|SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court","og_description":"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-10-14T04:00:14+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-10-17T03:59:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/","name":"BHC:Apprehension of delay sufficient for filing condonation|SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp","datePublished":"2025-10-14T04:00:14+00:00","dateModified":"2025-10-17T03:59:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Bombay High Court held that in trial, apprehension of delay was sufficient for filing condonation and thus allowed application with 118 days delay in filing appeal for grant of bail.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"delay sufficient for filing condonation"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/14\/bom-hc-apprehension-of-delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Apprehension of delay in trial constitutes sufficient cause for filing condonation of delay: Bombay High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/delay-sufficient-for-filing-condonation.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":207403,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/12\/29\/decisive-factor-for-condonation-of-delay-is-not-length-of-delay-but-sufficient-and-satisfactory-explanation\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":0},"title":"Decisive factor for condonation of delay is not length of delay but sufficient and satisfactory explanation","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 29, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Gujarat High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of S.H. Vora, J. allowed the condonation of delay as the sufficient cause stands justified. The petitioner has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 350 days caused in filing the criminal appeal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":215189,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/30\/j-application-for-condonation-of-delay-rejected\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":1},"title":"J&K HC | Unending period for launching remedy may lead to an unending uncertainty and consequential anarchy; application for condonation of delay rejected \u00a0","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J. rejected an application for seeking condonation of delay in the filing review petition. The facts of the case were that the petitioner filed an RTI application against the order wherein respondent have denied filling up of 36 vacancies under the ST\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":202920,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/01\/application-seeking-condonation-of-delay-must-meet-the-test-of-section-5-of-the-jammu-kashmir-limitation-samvat-1995-and-satisfy-the-court-with-sufficient-cause-for-delay\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":2},"title":"Application seeking condonation of delay must meet the test of Section 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Limitation Samvat, 1995 and satisfy the court with sufficient cause for delay","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 1, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge bench comprising of M.K. Hanjura, J. while dealing with an application for condonation of delay in filing a review petition, dismissed both the application as well as the petition on grounds of inordinate delay in filing the same. Brief facts of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":368850,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/05\/bom-hc-revisional-authority-cannot-reject-delay-condonation-matter-reserved-for-orders\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":3},"title":"Revisional authority cannot reject condonation of delay application merely because matter reserved for orders: Bombay High Court","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"December 5, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe revisional authority ought to have examined whether sufficient cause existed. Instead, it declined to consider the application merely on a technical ground.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"revisional authority condonation delay","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/blog-3-58.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/blog-3-58.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/blog-3-58.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/blog-3-58.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":361690,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/26\/bom-hc-litigant-shoud-not-suffer-due-to-lapse-on-part-of-advocate-office\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Litigant cannot be made to suffer on account of lapses of Advocate\u2019s office\u2019; Bombay HC condones 75-day delay in filing written statement","author":"Editor","date":"September 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court opined that the applicants, upon finding out the lapse by the advocate\u2019s office in filing the written statement, were vigilant enough to contact the Advocate themselves.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"lapse on part of advocate","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/lapse-on-part-of-advocate.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/lapse-on-part-of-advocate.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/lapse-on-part-of-advocate.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/lapse-on-part-of-advocate.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":324725,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/19\/gauhati-high-court-holds-bar-to-remarry-does-not-apply-on-application-for-condonation-of-delay\/","url_meta":{"origin":363680,"position":5},"title":"Gauhati HC holds bar to remarriage not applicable in case of delay in filing appeal against divorce decree","author":"Editor","date":"June 19, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Gauhati High Court holds statutory bar to remarry u\/s 15 HMA cannot be extended by filing application seeking condonation of delay to challenge the divorce decree.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Gauhati High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Gauhati-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Gauhati-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Gauhati-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Gauhati-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/363680","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=363680"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/363680\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/363687"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=363680"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=363680"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=363680"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}