SANJAY SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/petitioner has filed the present application for condonation of 204 days' delay in filing the revision petition.

(2.) It has been asserted that the applicant has challenged the order dtd. 3/10/2024, vide which the learned trial Court put the notice of accusation to the applicant. The applicant applied for a copy of the order on 1/4/2025, which was prepared on 2/4/2025 and was supplied on 3/4/2025, and the instant petition was filed on 25/4/2025. There is a delay of 204 days in filing the petition. The applicant was not aware of the fact that the order was to be challenged within the stipulated period of time. Learned counsel representing him did not guide the applicant to challenge the order putting the notice of accusation to the applicant. Therefore, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the delay in filing the revision petition be condoned.

(3.) The application is opposed by filing a reply. It has been asserted that the applicant had filed an application seeking his discharge, which was dismissed by the Court on 9/2/2024. Notice of accusation was put to the applicant, and the matter was listed for examination of prosecution witnesses. The party seeking the condonation of delay has to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, as mere assertion of the oversight of the counsel is not sufficient. The applicant had accepted the order passed by the Court, and he cannot challenge it. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be dismissed.