MUKESH BAIRWA S/O LATE SHRI CHITAR LAL, BY CASTE BAIRWA, AGE ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O SAMASPUR TEHSIL AND DISTRICT BARAN (RAJ.) Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision has arisen out of order dated 19.8.2016 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Baran in regular criminal appeal No.102/2016 whereby judgment and order dated 18.11.2013 passed by Additional Judicial Magistrate, Baran in regular criminal case No.745/2013 has been quashed and appeal is dismissed, in which the petitioner was convicted under Sec. 13 Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance and sentenced to deposit fine of Rs.100.00.

(2.) The impugned order of the District and Sessions Judge dated 19.8.2016 is not on the basis of merit of the case, rather the appeal has been dismissed for want of submission of appeal within limitation prescribed. Application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act submitted by the petitioner was rejected and delay of about 21/2 years was not condoned.

(3.) On perusal of the order, it reveals that the application for condonation of delay has been rejected merely because the appeal has been filed with delay of 21/2 years. Learned Sessions Judge has not considered any reason assigned by the petitioner in its application under Sec. 5 Limitation Act and the impugned order has been passed in very cryptic manner, non speaking and without any reason. It is mandate of the law that the application for condonation of delay should not have been disposed of in such a cursory manner. Therefore the impugned order appears to be against the principle of law and propriety.