V -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUiT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28rii DAY OF JULY 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO CRIMINAL PETITION No.10497/2011 Between: Mohmed Yusuf, S/o. Abdul Razaq, Badagandi, Age: 41 years, Residing at C/o. Moffussil Depot—I, NWKRTC, Gokul Road Hubli, Dhanvad District. .. . Petitioner (Bc Shri R.M.Javed, Advocate) And: I. Smt. Anjum. D/o. Ibrahim Saudi. Claims to be the wife of Mohmed Yusuf, Badagandi, Age: 31 years, Residing at C/o. Ibrahim Saudi, Momin Galli. Near Masjid. Jamkhandi, District: Bagalkot. 2. Tufail, S/o. Mohmed Yusuf, Badagandi. Age: 09 years, Since Minor represented by Mother and guardian respondent No.1. . ..Respondents (By Shri M.C.Hukkeri, Advocate for Ri.) This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the A —2— order passed by the District and Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer. Fast Track Court. Jamkhandi in Criminal Revision Petition No.75/20 10 dated 31.01.2011 in dismissing Interlocutory Application No.1 filed for delay condonation and consequent dismissal of main revision petition. This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: - ORDER Heard Shri R.M.Javed. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on Miscellaneous Criminal No.16200/2011 for recalling the order dated 01.07.2011. 2. Perused the affidavit filed along with the application for recalling the order. I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out grounds for reca1lin the order dated 01.07.2011 dismissing the petition. The order dated 01.07.2011 is hereby recalled. Hence, Miscellaneous Criminal No.16200/2011 is allowed. 3. Heard Shri R.M.Javed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri M.C.Hukkeri, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1. 4. It is seen tliat the learned Sessions t idg° has dismissed the revision petition on tlit’ ground that there is dcla of 35 cia’ s in filing tht revision petitinn. rhougli the reason br clcla is not satistactor. it is nec’essan to impart full jiistic e to thc parties and that the matter should be- heard on merits 1w the learned Sessions .Judge. I rider the eircumstanes. tin dc-la’ caused in filing the revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge deserves to be condoned. 3. Aecordingl , the ciela of 35 cla S caused in filing the revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge.t iamkhandi is hereb3 condoned The matter is remitted bark to tiic- leanwci Sessions .Judae nh H direction to entertain the said re isbn Pt tition in its original number and dispose of the same after heanng both the parties and in accordance with la and on payment of rost ot Rs I .OoO in tb respondent In tiit’ petitioner herein on the first da3 ob appearance ot the parties before the learned Sessions Judgc. 4 6. Ii is cliretti d that I),th th T)artits. or theit counsel shall be present before the learned Sessions .Judge cii ln.OS.201 I. withtnii waititw fca the notice from the learned Sessions Judge. The learned Sc ssions Judge is directed to (lispose c.f the said applic alion within three months. if not earlier after hearing the parties on merits. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent. submits that a sum of Rs.7O.000 is in ;inears The petitioner is direc ted to deposit a sum of Rs.35.UUO within one week from the date of his appearance and the learned Sessions •Judge is direeted to disburse the said amount to the respondent wife immedtatel after its deposit. Sd/ JUDGE Rsh