Om Prakash alias Nitu vs. State of HP Cr. MP(M) No. 909 of 2026 22.5.2026 Present: Mr. Het Ram, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State. Cr.MP(M) No. 909 of 2026 Present application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the criminal revision. It has been asserted that the petitioner is an indigent person. He is in custody and had applied for the legal aid. The petitioner sought documents from the Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority for filing the revision. The complete record was not sent and a reminder had to be issued. Ultimately, some documents were received and the present revision was prepared. Hence the application. No reply to the application is to be filed. Heard. The contents of the application are duly supported by the documents annexed to the application which shows that the complete record was not provided to the learned Legal Aid Counsel and hence revision could not be prepared. Since the person is indigent and not in a position to engage a counsel, therefore, he cannot be penalized for his poverty. Hence, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the revision is ordered to be condoned. Application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision (ST) No. 3788 of 2026 Vide separate order passed in the application Cr.MP(M) No. 909 of 2026 the delay in filing the revision has been condoned. Revision be registered. Notice. Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Copy of the revision be supplied to the learned Additional Advocate General. Records be called for. Cr. MP (ST) No. 3791 of 2026 Vide separate order passed in the application Cr.MP(M) No. 909 of 2026 the delay in filing the revision has been condoned. Application be registered. Notice in the aforesaid terms. Reply, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks. The applicant/petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years, pay a fine of ₹1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the commission of offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC; and to undergo simple imprisonment for six months, pay fine of ₹1,00/- (Rupees One Hundred) and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days for the commission of offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1 Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. in Case No. 139 of 2016. Heard. It appears from the record that the legal aid counsel was provided to the applicant/petitioner and an application for condonation of delay was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. on the ground that the delay cannot be condoned as a matter of generosity. The applicant could have approached to the Court earlier. Prima facie, the reasons for dismissal of the application are questionable. In view of the above and the fact that since the disposal of the revision is likely to take some time, hence the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the learned Trial Court is ordered to be suspended till further orders, subject to furnishing of the personal and surety bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court with an undertaking to appear and serve the sentence, in case of dismissal of the present revision and subject to deposit of fine amount, if not deposited earlier, within a period of one month from today. The bail bonds, so furnished by the applicant/petitioner be transmitted to this Court for placing the same on record. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court for information. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 22nd May, 2026 (Chander)