1 S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.374/2008 (Jarnail Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) Date of order : March 25, 2008 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR,J. Mr.Devendra Singh Dev, for the petitioner. Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, P.P. for the State. Mr.Shrikant Verma, for respondent No.2. By the instant criminal misc. petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the order dt. 21.2.2008 passed in S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.1485/2007, his presence may be recorded. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though initially when the order was being dictated, he was not present in Court, however, subsequently, during the course of dictating the order, he appeared and requested for marking of his presence. This fact has not been disputed by Mr.Shrikant Verma, counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and according to the learned counsel, not marking name of learned counsel for the petitioner is due to typographical error. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the 2 case and the fact that learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 also submits that Mr.Devendra Singh Dev counsel for the petitioners appeared, I consider it just and proper to allow the petition. Consequently, the petition is allowed. However, it is made clear that on 21.2.2008, when S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.1485/2007 was decided, Mr.Devendra Singh Dev appeared and his presence is accordingly marked in place of “None for the petitioners”. (H.R.PANWAR),J. m.asif/-