M. SINGARAJA AND ORS. Vs. RAJESHWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision Petitioners/Petitioners have projected the instant Criminal Revision Petition (MD) No. 74 of 2014 before this Court, being aggrieved against the order dated 18.12.2013 in Crl.M.P. No. 1309 of 2013 in unfiled Crl.A. No. ../2013 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai.

(2.) The Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai while passing the impugned order dated 18.12.2013 in Crl.M.P. No. 1309 of 2013 in unfiled C.A. No. .../2013 [filed by the Revision Petitioners/Petitioners] at Paragraph No. 6 had inter alia observed that.... "In the case on hand, the petitioners have not shown convincing cause for the enormous delay of 127 days. As per the contention of the respondent the petitioners have attended the Court in HMOP and GWOP which reveal the intention of the petitioners to drag on the litigation. Considering all the above reasons, this Court holds that since no convincing reason is substantiated in respect of the delay in filing the appeal, this Court is not inclined to allow the petition." and resultantly dismissed the petition.

(3.) Assailing the validity and legality of the order of dismissal dated 18.12.2013 in Crl.M.P. No. 1309 of 2013 in unfiled C.A. No. .. of 2013 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai, the Revision Petitioners/Petitioners have preferred the present Criminal Revision Petition before this Court contending that the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai had committed an error in dismissing the miscellaneous petition in question (delay condonation petition) by observing that the first Revision Petitioner/Husband had not produced any medical evidence to establish that he was hospitalized.