YUSUF MEHTAB QURESHI Vs. AFZAL KHAN SAFDAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent, calling for record and proceedings dispensed with. By consent heard finally, forthwith. The petitioner had filed a complaint against respondent Nos. 1 to 7 herein, alleging commission of various offences, such as cheating, forgery etc. by them. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 34th Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai, in whose court the said complaint was filed, had ordered an investigation into the matter as contemplated under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After investigation, the police reported that, there was no case for proceeding against the respondents i.e. the accused named in the complaint. The learned Magistrate, based on the report of investigation, concluded that, the dispute was of a civil nature and that, there were no ingredients of any of the offences. Holding so, he dismissed the complaint, by an order dated 18/3/2010.

(2.) The petitioner then approached the court of sessions, invoking its revisional jurisdiction. However, the revision was filed only on 9/9/2010. An application for condonation of delay was, therefore, filed along with the revision application. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, before whom the revision application with the application for condonation of delay came up for hearing, observed that no ground was made out for condoning the delay. He, therefore, dismissed the application for condonation of delay.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 7.