STATE OF HP Versus PRADEEP KUMAR AND ORS CRMPM-2660 of 2025 10.03.2026 Present: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the petitioner/State Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate, for respondents No.1, 2 and 5. Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3, 4 and 6. Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Divya Raj Thakur, Advocate, for respondents No.7 & 8. CRMPM-2660 of 2025 By way of instant application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner/State for condonation of delay in maintaining the accompanying criminal revision petition, which is barred by limitation. Despite opportunity, no reply to the application has been filed, however, having perused the averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by affidavit, this Court is convinced and satisfied that delay in maintaining the accompanying criminal revision petition is neither intentional nor deliberate, rather same has occurred on account of lengthy administrative process and as such, delay of 62 days in filing the petition, which in my considered view has been sufficiently explained, is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision No.________ of 2026 Be registered. Notice. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Divya Raj Thakur, Advocate, waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 and 5, respondents No.3, 4 & 6 and respondents No.7 & 8, respectively. Since brief of learned Senior Counsel representing the respondents No.7 & 8 is not complete, he prays for and is granted two weeks’ time to do the needful. List on 30.03.2026. March 10, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge