p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.135 of 2026 and I.A. No.202 of 2026 Nilamadhab Sa …. Petitioner Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Kumar Naik …. Opposite Parties Mr. A.K. Pati, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 19.03.2026 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the learned SDJM, Sambalpur in T.R. Case No.2247 of 2025 arising out of 1CC Case No.645 of 2021 taking cognizance of offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, is assailed in this Criminal Revision. 3. Admittedly, there is delay of 1400 days in preferring this revision and in paragraph-4 of the I.A. for condonation of delay the reason has been stated as under; “4. That a delay of 1400 days has occasioned in filing of the present Criminal Revision Application due to ill-health of the Petitioner's parents as he was unable to p. 2 attend to other matters and the advocate of the Petitioner did not communicate regarding the case to the Petitioner. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that the delay is neither deliberate nor intentional and the same may kindly be condoned.” 4. Taking into account the recitals and the submission made in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shivamma (Dead) by Lrs vs. Karnataka Housing Board and Ors. reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1969, this Court is not persuaded to hold that sufficient cause has been shown in assailing the order of cognizance in an accusation under Section 138 of N.I. Act resulting in delay of 1400 days. 5. The I.A. for condonation of delay is accordingly rejected. 6. Hence, this Court does not delve into the merits of the criminal revision. The same accordingly stands disposed of along with pending I.As., if any. (V. Narasingh) Judge Ayesha