SANTOSH KUMAR TANDON Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE his judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8.10.92, passed by the District Magistrate, Almora, Maruti Van No. UAI 8416 of the petitioner was confiscated under Section 72 of the Excise Act, Appeal No. 15 of 1992 preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Almora vide his Judgment dated 14th February, 1994. It is that judgment dated 14.2.94 which has been challenged by the petitioner in this revision petition.

(2.) ALONG with the memo of revision an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 5 months 28 days delay has been filed. Vide order dated 10.8.94, passed by this court, the applicant was directed to deposit Rs. 2,000 as security for expenses of the opposit -party. It was further directed that on receipt of the amount notice of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act shall be issued to the opposite party. The said amount was accordingly deposited on 18.8.94 and receipt therefor has been placed on record of this file. A perusal of the office report dated 8.4.95 shows that notice was issued to the learned Government Advocate which was duly served. No counter affidavit or reply to the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed till date. Learned counsel for the State submits that he is ready to argue the matter on merits today.

(3.) IN view of the above discussion it is obvious that the impugned judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Almora, dated 14.2.94 cannot be sustained.