Hon'Ble Ravindra Maithani vs Nain Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4032 UK

Delay Condonation Application (IA) No.2 of 2021
In
CRLR No.17 of 2021
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate for the revisionist.

Mr. Pankaj Joshi, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no.1.

Mr. Tarun Prakash Singh Takuli, Advocate for respondent no.2.

This is a revision preferred against the following:-

(i) Judgment and order dated 04.05.2018, passed in Criminal Case No.492 of 2013, Indra Dev Pasi Vs. Nain Singh, by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar ("the case"). By it, the revisionist has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, "the Act") and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of `2,00,000/- with the stipulation that out from the fine, `1,90,000/- shall be paid to the respondent no.2 ("complainant") and,

(ii) Judgment and order dated 09.07.2019, passed in Criminal Appeal No.103 of 2018, Nain Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, which was dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The revision is delayed. Delay Condonation Application (IA) No.2 of 2021 has been filed, on which, notices were issued to the respondent no.2, Indra Dev Pasi. This matter was listed on 07.11.2022 in the National Lok Adalat on behalf of the respondent no.2, Indra Dev Pasi, it was told that he has expired. Therefore, the matter could not be settled in the Lok Adalat.

The respondent no.2 has yet not been substituted.

Learned counsel appearing for the revisionist would submit that the revisionist does not press his delay condonation application. He wants to withdraw it.

Learned counsel, who earlier represented the respondent no.2 would submit that the revisionist should substitute the respondent no.2, so that the interest of the respondent no.2 may be safeguarded.

Since, revisionist does not press delay condonation application, this Court cannot proceed further with the revision.

This is a criminal revision, which has yet not been admitted. Once admitted, a criminal revision is to be decided on merits. But, as stated, it has yet not been admitted. Now, the revisionist does not press the delay condonation application. In fact, it is withdrawn. Therefore, there is no other option available except to dismiss the Delay Condonation Application (IA) No.2 of 2021.

Delay Condonation Application (IA) No.2 of 2021 is dismissed. Consequent to it, the revision also stands dismissed.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 16.12.2022 Sanjay