Saroj Kumari Vs. State Bank of India Cr. MP(M) No. 2919 of 2024 02.05.2025 Present: Mr. Tanu Sharma, Advocate, Legal-Aid Counsel, for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate, for the non- applicant/respondent. Reply has not been filed. 2. Heard. 3. The present application has been filed for condonation of 228 days’ delay in filing the revision petition. It has been asserted a Legal Aid Counsel was provided to the applicant/petitioner and she could not file the revision petition earlier. Hence the application. 4. The fact that a Legal Aid Counsel has been appointed to represent the applicant/petitioner which means that she does not have sufÏcient means to defend herself. A person cannot be penalized for her poverty and therefore, the delay in approaching the Legal Services Committee and thereafter getting a legal-aid counsel is required to be condoned. 5. Consequently, the present application is allowed and the delay in filing the criminal revision petition is ordered to be condoned. 6. The present application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision No. _____ of 2025 (Cr. Revision-ST No. 12895 of 2024). 7. Mr. Arvind Sharma, learned counsel appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent-SBI. 8. The delay in filing the revision petition has been condoned vide separate order passed in Cr.MP(M) No. 2919 of 2024. Petition be registered. 9. Copy of the petition be supplied to learned counsel for the respondent-SBI. 10. Record of learned Courts below be requisitioned within four weeks and the matter be listed thereafter. Cr.MP No. _____of 2024 (Cr.MP-ST No.12896 of 2025. 11. Notice in the aforesaid terms. 12. Application be registered. 13. Reply to the application, as prayed, be filed within two weeks and the same be listed along with main petition. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 2nd May, 2025 (Chander)