Full Text
Translation output
-$a
.i/Aa
-'
IJ t
6g#$-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF
CRL.L.P. 194/2OLL
AJAY TALWAR
Through:
.i/Aa
-'
IJ t
6g#$-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF
CRL.L.P. 194/2OLL
AJAY TALWAR
Through:
VERSUS
PREM SINGH
DDLHI AT NEW DELHI..... Petitioner
MIr. B. Khan, Advocate.
? ..... Respondent
Through: None.
DDLHI AT NEW DELHI..... Petitioner
MIr. B. Khan, Advocate.
? ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
04.0s.2011
CrI.
M.A. No. 4815/20LL (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.
M.A. No. 4814/201.1 (Delav)
This is a leave to appeal against order of acquittal dated 26th May, 2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitting the
Respondent for offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable
Instrurnents Act. The present leave to appeal petition has been filed after a delay of 1205 days. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that partly the delay has been on the count that the Petitioner after the acquiual in ignorance of law filed a revision petition on 17th July, 2007 which though filed within limitation was not maintainable and thus the learned oh
,{ l_;, CRL.L.P. 194/2011 Page I of 2
2011:DHC:16530 itu
Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the same on 6th February, 2010.
However he has no explanation to render for the period of delay thereafter.
The order of learned Additional Sessions Judge was passed on 6th February, 2010 whereas the present leave to appeal has been filed on 19m April,20II.
Thus there is a delay of more than 14 months in filing the present leave petition even after the dismissal of the revision petition. The application for delay is totally bereft of the facts as to the reasons for delay thereafter. The only thing which is stated is that the Petitioner was busy due to business tour and lastly on 25th Decernber,2010 the Petitioner contacted his counsel and the counsel advised the Petitioner to file the appeal against the order dated
26rh May,2007. Even after contacting the counsel on 25th December, 2010 this leave to appeal petition has been filed after nearly four months, that is, on 19th April, 20L0. I find no reason to condon the delay.
Application is dismissed.
CRL.L.P. 19412011
Since the delay has not been condoned, the leave to appeal petition is dismissed.
Wrc-
" MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 04,2011 vn
CRL.L.P. 194/2011
2011:DHC:16530
04.0s.2011
CrI.
M.A. No. 4815/20LL (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.
M.A. No. 4814/201.1 (Delav)
This is a leave to appeal against order of acquittal dated 26th May, 2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitting the
Respondent for offence punishable under Section 138 Negotiable
Instrurnents Act. The present leave to appeal petition has been filed after a delay of 1205 days. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that partly the delay has been on the count that the Petitioner after the acquiual in ignorance of law filed a revision petition on 17th July, 2007 which though filed within limitation was not maintainable and thus the learned oh
,{ l_;, CRL.L.P. 194/2011 Page I of 2
2011:DHC:16530 itu
Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the same on 6th February, 2010.
However he has no explanation to render for the period of delay thereafter.
The order of learned Additional Sessions Judge was passed on 6th February, 2010 whereas the present leave to appeal has been filed on 19m April,20II.
Thus there is a delay of more than 14 months in filing the present leave petition even after the dismissal of the revision petition. The application for delay is totally bereft of the facts as to the reasons for delay thereafter. The only thing which is stated is that the Petitioner was busy due to business tour and lastly on 25th Decernber,2010 the Petitioner contacted his counsel and the counsel advised the Petitioner to file the appeal against the order dated
26rh May,2007. Even after contacting the counsel on 25th December, 2010 this leave to appeal petition has been filed after nearly four months, that is, on 19th April, 20L0. I find no reason to condon the delay.
Application is dismissed.
CRL.L.P. 19412011
Since the delay has not been condoned, the leave to appeal petition is dismissed.
Wrc-
" MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 04,2011 vn
CRL.L.P. 194/2011
2011:DHC:16530
JUDGMENT