RAVI TIKU Vs. HIMALYAN PIPE INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both these petitions praying for condonation of delay in filing the appeals, therefore, these are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Brief and undisputed facts leading to the filing of these applications are that the applicant was tried on two different complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan and both the trials resulted in his conviction and sentence. He preferred two appeals both of which were dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, on 24/9/2001 and 25/9/2001 subject to modification that the sentences of fine imposed in both the cases was slightly reduced. The applicant, however, did not seek any redressal against the convictions and sentences imposed on him within the period of limitation. Hence, the present application s.

(3.) It is averred that the applicant, who wants to file appeals against the said convictions and sentences, which he could not do within the limitation for the reason that he was sick and bedridden due to disc and back problem, therefore, could not contact his Counsel to file the appeal. Even at present, when he is lodged in the prison, he is undergoing treatment. Hence according to the applicant, there is sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeals