Vishal Modgil vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma Cr. MP(M) No. 1392 of 2025 30.7.2026 Present: Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondent. The applicant has filed the present application for condonation of 106 days’ delay in filing the revision. It has been asserted that the judgment was passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nalagarh on 05.08.2024. The copy of the judgment was applied for on 28.08.2024, which was prepared on 02.09.2024. The copy was received on 09.09.2024. The applicant fell ill in the month of October, 2024. When his health condition improved, his son met with an accident while driving a motorcycle on 23.03.2025. The applicant remained with his son and was not in a position to come to Shimla to file the revision petition. The delay in filing the revision was not intentional but due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the delay in filing the revision be condoned. 2. The notice of the application was issued to the respondent. Initially, the respondent appeared through a learned counsel, who sought time to file the power of attorney, but subsequently, when the matter was taken up on 27.07.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the respondent and the power of attorney was also not filed. Therefore, the matter was heard in the absence of the respondent. 3. Mr M.L. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner, submitted that the applicant fell ill after getting the certified copy of the judgment of the learned Appellate Court. His son met with an accident, and the applicant had to take care of him. The applicant had sufficient reason for the condonation of the delay. Hence, he prayed that the present application be allowed and the delay in filing the revision be condoned. 4. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully. 5. The plea of the applicant is duly supported by the certificates issued by Guru Nanak Hospital and the treatment slip of Sohana Hospital. The respondent has also not appeared before the Court to submit that the documents are not correct or that the applicant was not ill or his son had not sustained injuries in the accident. Therefore, the plea of the applicant has to be accepted as correct that he was ill and his son had met with an accident. The illness and accident are the circumstances beyond the control of a person and would constitute a sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In the present case, the applicant was unable to file the revision because of his illness and the accident of his son. Therefore, the applicant had a sufficient cause with him. 6. Consequently, the present application is allowed, and the delay in filing the revision is ordered to be condoned. 7. The present application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision (ST) No. 4860 of 2025 8. The delay in filing the revision has been ordered to be condoned vide separate order passed in Cr.MP(M) No. 1392 of 2025; it be registered. 9. List for consideration after one week. Cr. MP (ST) No.4862 of 2025. 10. Application be registered and listed along with the main matter. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 30th July, 2026 (Chander)