Sri Prasenjit Roy vs The State Of Tripura
2023 Latest Caselaw 565 Tri

                                   Page 1 of 2




                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
              IA No.01 of 2023 IN Crl. Rev. P No.37 of 2023
Sri Prasenjit Roy
                                                       ...... Applicant(s)

                              VERSUS
The State of Tripura
                                                       ......Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. R.G. Chakraborty, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Debnath, Addl. P.P.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH

_O_ R_ D_ E_ R_ 01/08/2023 Heard learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor on the prayer for condonation of delay of 344

days in preferring the instant revision petition.

The revision petition is directed against the judgment dated

02.05.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2021 by the Court of

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sepahijala Judicial District whereby the

learned appellate Court has confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed

upon the petitioner by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,

Bishalgarh, Sepahijala in connection with PRC(SP) No.24 of 2014

whereunder the petitioner has been sentenced to suffer RI for one month

under Section 279 of IPC and also suffer RI for six months for the offence

under Section 304-A of IPC with a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 187 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and a default sentence in lieu thereof.

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that

petitioner is a paramedic who is engaged for most of the time in connection

with his occupation and, therefore, some time was consumed in obtaining

the papers and approaching learned counsel for filing of the revision petition.

In the midst, he had also approached another lawyer. He submits that delay

is not intentional but petitioner may suffer irreparably if the delay is not

condoned as the punishment may operate as a stigma upon him.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor does not object to the

prayer.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the

parties and the explanation urged, delay is condoned.

Interlocutory application stands disposed of.

(APARESH KUMAR SINGH) CJ

Dipesh