Nisha Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 25.11.2011 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaur whereby charges have been framed against the present petitioner for the offences under Sections 323, 325 and 307 IPC. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has also been presented as the revision was filed delayed one. The contention of the present petitioner is that the present petitioner has no knowledge about limitation for filing the revision petition and the revision petition is delayed due to bona fide mistake which is liable to be condoned. The only contention of the present petitioner is that he has no knowledge of the law of limitation but ignorance of law cannot be made an excuse and hence this ground cannot be treated to be a reasonable and sufficient ground for condonation of delay.
(2.) FURTHER more, the merit of the case suggests that the FIR has been lodged on the statement of the injured himself stating therein that the present petitioner run the vehicle over him and as a result, he and other suffered injuries. The contention of the present petitioner is that it is a case of accident which has given the colour of attempt to murder and in the opinion of the medical officer, the injuries are not dangerous to life and false and frivolous case has been lodged against him. To charge a person under Section 307, IPC, only the nature of injuries are not relevant factors but the manner of incident, weapon used and place of injuries are also relevant factors and the contention of the prosecution is that the present petitioner has run the vehicle over the injured persons and the charge under Section 307 IPC has been rightly framed against the present petitioner. Hence looking to the fact that the revision petition has been filed after a considerable delay and no case is made out for condonation of delay, the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is dismissed and as a result, this revision petition is also dismissed.;