RANJIT KUMAR GARG,J. - (1.) The petitioners/applicants have prayed for condonation of delay of 329 days by filing an application being CRAN 2616 of 2015 in preferring the revision being CRR 2660 of 2015.
(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners/applicants and learned counsel for the opposite party and on consideration of the contents of the application for condonation of delay, I am of the view that the delay is explained to the satisfaction of the Court. Accordingly, the delay in preferring the revision is condoned. CRAN 2616 of 2015 is, thus, disposed of.
(3.) The petitioners have challenged the order dated January 6, 2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Asansol, in Criminal Motion no.1 of 2015 affirming the order dated November 18, 2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Asansol, in Complaint Case no.61 of 2008 by preferring the revision under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in CRR no.2568 of 2015. Similarly, the petitioners have challenged the order dated September 12, 2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Asansol, in Complaint Case no.61 of 2008 by preferring the revision under Sections 397/401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in CRR no.2660 of 2015. Both the revisions are taken up for hearing on consent of learned counsel representing both parties and the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.;