RAM KISHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. SURINDER AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have filed Crl.M. No.278-MA of 2011 seeking leave to prefer an appeal as against the judgement of acquittal recorded by the trial Court for the offence under Section 120-B, 302 and 201 IPC. As the applicants did not evince any interest in prosecuting the application inspite of sufficient opportunity offered to them, we chose to dismiss the said application vide our earlier order dated 20.10.2011.

(2.) Crl.M. No.62158 of 2011 has been filed by the applicants invoking the provision under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking restoration of the Crl.M. No.278-MA of 2011 which was dismissed for non-prosecution.

(3.) We heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants. After all, the order was passed by us in Crl.M. No.278-MA of 2011 not on merit, but on the basis of non-prosecution of the application filed seeing leave to appeal. Cogent reason has been assigned by the applicants that their counsel was virtually arguing the case before another Hon'ble Judge of this Court on the day when the said application was coming up for hearing. Further, we feel that Crl.M.No.278-MA of 2011 should be disposed of on merit.