MAYA RAM SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this revision petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside and reversal of the order of acquittal dated 28. 3. 2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge Shri D. C. Anand in Cri. Appeal No. 7/2002 arising out of FIR No. 295/98, under Sections 381/411 ipc, Police Station Vivek Vihar, Delhi and prays for condonation of delay in filing the petition by way of an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, being Cri. Misc. 1137/2002.

(2.) FIRST, the application for condonation of delay. There appears to be a delay of 101 days in the filing of this petition, which is sought to be justified by the petitioner on the ground that the State having refused to file an appeal against the order of acquittal, the petitioner/complainant had to seek the requisite permission from the State for impugning the order of acquittal passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge and the state's permission to file this petition was received by the petitioner on 9. 10. 2002, that is, after more than five months (about 158 days) and the petition was filed two days thereafter. The aforesaid explanation, in my view, justifies the delay in filing the petition, which is accordingly condoned.

(3.) ADVERTING to the material facts necessary for deciding the present revision petition, the case of the prosecution is that accused/respondent No. 2 herein was challaned to face trial on the allegation that on 9. 10. 1998 at about 5:35 p. m. at D-50, viyek Vihar, Delhi, as an employee of the petitioner (Maya Ram Sharma) he had committed theft of brass articles valued at rs. 35,000. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined six prosecution witnesses viz. PW1 ASI Sudesh Chand, PW2 Maya ram Sharma (petitioner herein), PW3 Ct. K. P. Mohan, PW4 Ct. Ashok Kumar, PW5 rakesh Raviranjan and PW6 SI Shriniwas rajora.