2013 (2) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... JUDGEMENT Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Unless it is shown that the department has taken action against prosecutor, who was at fault in the delay caused, there would be no question of entertaining this application. This has been clarified in the order dated3rd August, 2012. But it seems that nothing has been done by the department so far. If the department considers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e application forcondonation would not arise. List the application on 17.8.2012. Order dated 17th September, 2012: 1. None   for   the   applicant   ­ Union   of   India   in   this   matter   of condonation of delay of about 110 days in filing Appeal against the acquittal. 2. Respondent No.1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and to explain the laxity of Counsel for Union of India who is assigned this matter, when apparently the present matter is of very sensitive nature involving import of gold of huge amount. Stand over for one week. Mentioned at 1:30 p.m. : 4. Later on, learned Special Public Prosecutor Mrs. A.A. Mane for Union of India appeared and prayed for time to argue. Hence, notice to the Standing Counsel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X