IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.MMO No. 777 of 2026 Date of Decision:27.07.2026 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Devender Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Suresh Kumar …Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 . ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner: Ms. Dhanvanti Devi, Advocate. For the Respondent: Nemo. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for extension of time to comply with order dated 27.12.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan (Camp at Arki) District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, in Cr.M.A. Registration No.2712 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal registration No.190 of 2025, titled Devender Kumar versus Suresh Kumar. 2. Having regard to the nature of the prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court deems it not necessary to issue notice to the respondent because it would not only cause inconvenience to him, rather he would be unnecessarily burdened to engage counsel to represent him in the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 instant proceedings, which can be otherwise disposed of on the basis of material available on record. 3. Averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by the affidavit as well as other material adduced on record by the petitioner, reveal that he, being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Arki, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, preferred an appeal in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan (Camp at Arki), District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. Along with the appeal, he also filed an application for suspension of sentence, which came to be allowed vide order dated 27.12.2025, subject to his depositing 20% of the compensation amount before the learned trial Court within 60 days. Since needful has still not been done by the petitioner, coupled with the fact that the Court below has no power to extend time beyond 90 days, petitioner was compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 4. Though, having taken note of the fact that repeatedly time was granted by the Court below, enabling petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, there appears to be no justification to grant further time, but by way of indulgence and to do complete justice, one more opportunity of 15 days is granted to the petitioner to comply with the order dated 27.12.2025, failing 3 which interim protection granted to the petitioner vide aforesaid order shall come to an end, and respondent-complainant would be at liberty to get the judgment of trial Court executed in accordance with law. Till then, judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Court below shall remain stayed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge July 27,2026 (shankar)