- (1.) We are not inclined to accede to the prayer made by the petitioners for hearing in open Court. The same is rejected.
(2.) The instant petitions have been filed by the petitioners for review of the judgment dated 2.12.2015 rendered by this Court in the above-mentioned writ petitions and criminal appeal. The Review Petition (Crl.) Nos.560-564 of 2016 are barred by 208 days, whereas Review Petition (Crl.) No.27 of 2017 is barred by 358 days. There is no satisfactory explanation for condonation of such huge delay.
(3.) Thus, though the present petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay itself, yet we have carefully gone the petitions for review, the judgment impugned and the papers connected therewith. We are satisfied that there is no error apparent on the face of the record of the case, warranting reconsideration of the judgment impugned. The instant petitions are without any merit.;