High Court of DelhiCRL.REV.P./746/2015

Fateh Singh Negi v. The State ( Govt Of NCT Delhi) & ANR

2016-07-26Hon'Ble Mr. Justice P.S.Teji2 pages

I •> $-43 & 22 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P.

746/2015 FATEH SINGH NEGI Petitioner Through:

Mr. K.B. Upadhyay, Advocate versus THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ANR Respondent Through:

Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public r Prosecutorfor the State + CRL.REV.P.

747/2015 EATEH SINGH NEGI Petitioner Through:

Mr. K.B. Upadhyay, Advocate versus THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ANR Respondent Through:

Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

CORAM:

^ HON'BLEMR. JUSTICEP.S.TEJI

ORDER

% 26.07.2016 A..

^ Crl. M.A. No. 16887/2015 (condonation of delay of 751 days) in Crl. Rey. P. No. 746/2015 Crl. M.A. No. 16891/2015 (condonation of delay of 751 days) in Crl. Rey. P. No. 747/2015.

By these applications, petitioner seeks condonation of delay of 751 days in filing the accompanying revision petitions against the Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

order dated 31.07.2013 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in Appeal No.2/12 and 3/12. While going through the contents of the petition, it is revealed that the petitioner had preferred the appeal against the order dated 18.07.2012, whereby the petitioner was convicted for committing offence punishable under Section 138/142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 31.07.2013, hM passed an order for release of the petitioner on r probationofone year.

This Court observes that the petitioner has filed the present revision petition just to avoid the payment of fine and compensation to the respondent and that too after a lapse of 751days and the probation period of one year has already been completed. In the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay of 751 days in preferring the present revision petition. Accordingly the application is dismissed being without merit. Crl. Rev. P. No. 746/2015 & CrI. Rev. P. No. 747/2015.

Since the application for seeking condonation of delay in r preferring the present petitions have been dismissed being without merit, therefore the present revision petitions are also dismissed and disposed of as such.

JULY 26,2016 pkb