1 SBCR.MISC.PETITION NO. 513/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 513/09 Raghuveer Singh and Others Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 13/04/2009 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J. Mr. R.S.Gill for the petitioners. Mr. O.P.Singaria, Public Prosecutor Issue notice. Learned public prosecutor accepts the notice. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard and decided at this stage. By the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have challenged the order dated 7.1.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Anoopgarh, H.Q. Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Carefully gone through the order impugned. 2 SBCR.MISC.PETITION NO. 513/2009 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the Judicial Magistrate, Suratgarh in Criminal Case No.336/03 acquitted the petitioners by judgment and order dated 05.12.2007 against which State preferred an appeal before Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Anoopgarh, H.Q. Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar (for short 'the appellate court' hereinafter) which was barred by period of limitation and without notice to the accused petitioners, learned appellate court has condoned the delay and issued notice of the appeal to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before condoning the delay, the petitioners have right to be heard on the point of delay as to whether the delay deserves to be condoned or not. Be that as it may, from the perusal of the order impugned, it no where appears that before condoning the delay, notice was ever issued to the petitioners who are accused in the matter. In this view of the matter, the criminal misc. petition is allowed, the order impugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Anoopgarh, H.Q. Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar to hear and decide the application seeking condonation of delay filed by the State after affording an opportunity of hearing to the accused petitioners. It is made clear that the appellate court after hearing the petitioners may decide the application seeking condonation 3 SBCR.MISC.PETITION NO. 513/2009 of delay according to law. Counsel for the petitioners submits that notice of the appeal have already been served on the petitioners and therefore, the accused petitioners would appear on the next date fixed by the appellate court. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp 4 SBCR.MISC.PETITION NO. 513/2009 S.B.Cr. Misc. Stay Petition No.703/2009 In S.B.Cr. Misc. Petition No. 513/2009 Date of Order : 13/04/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. R.S.Gill for the petitioners. Mr. O.P.Singaria, Public Prosecutor Since the criminal misc. petition itself has been allowed, the stay petition stands disposed of. (H.R.PANWAR), J. rp