JOGINDER SINGH Versus SHANTA KUMAR AND OTHERS CRMPM-3048 of 2025 16.03.2026 Present: Mr. Abhay Gupta, proxy counsel, for the petitioner. Mr. Shekhar Badola, proxy counsel, for respondents. CRMPM-3048 of 2025 Mr. Shekhar Badola, learned proxy counsel, has filed memo of appearance of Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate, for respondents Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 12. He fairly states that he does not intend to file reply to the application and shall have no objection in case delay in maintaining the accompanying criminal revision petition is allowed. Notice issued to respondent No.3 received back unserved with the report that he has gone to Dubai. Having carefully 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 the circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the applicant/petitioner and as such, delay in filing the petition, which in my considered view has been sufficiently explained, is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision Petition No._____ of 2026 Be registered. Notice. Mr. Shekhar Badola, learned proxy counsel, waives service of notice on behalf of respondents Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 12. He prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file Power of Attorney. Notice to respondent No.3 be also issued, on taking steps within a period of one week, returnable for 07.05.2026. March 16, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge