AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 18.08.2018 passed by Session Judge, District Pratapgarh (hereinafter referred to be 'trial court') in Session Case No. 65/2018 whereby, charges have been framed against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 460, 307 IPC.
This criminal revision petition has been filed after a delay of 234 days and an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed with a prayer for condoning the said delay. In the said application, it is averred that the petitioner was in jail since 13.06.2018 and he was enlarged on bail on 16.11.2018, after that, when he came to know about the impugned order, this criminal revision petition was filed by him. It is noticed that the petitioner had applied for certified copy of the order impugned for the first time on 11.03.2019 and the same was received by him on 12.03.2019. The petitioner has not explained that how it took around more than three and a half months to apply for obtaining certified copy of the order. It is also to be noticed that though certified copy of the impugned order was received by the petitioner on 12.03.2019 but this present revision petition has been filed before this Court on 10.04.2019 and the said delay of 28 days has also not been explained by the petitioner.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the charge-sheet, particularly the statements of injured Shanti Bai, who had specifically alleged that it was the petitioner who inflicted injury by knife upon her on the night of 04.04.2018. I am of the opinion that trial court has not convicting any illegality in framing the charge against the petitioner vide impugned order.
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on the merits.
Stay petition also stands dismissed.