+§ c -t |NTHE HIGH COURTOF SIKKIM 0 0F}DEF] SHEET Review Petltlon Culshan Ral NacrDal Versus State of S1]dcim and another No. 4 of 2004 Petitioner / - F]espondent Serial •. No.of orde; Order with Signature Off ice Note as to action (if any) taken on Order 1o 30.6.ZOO `CMA No. 21 of 2004 This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the review petition riled against order dated •15.12.2003 passed by this court in writ petition (C) No. 29/2003. According to the petitione.r there has been delay of 129 da.ys in filing the review petition and he has prayed to condone the delay. It has been stated in the application that the petitioner applied for the certified copy of the order under review on 13.5.2004 and went to Delhi for legal advice and thereafter he riled the same. Since the petitioner has been appearing in person we have reluctantly condoned the delay although no sufficient cause could be shown by him for exercise of our discretionary jurisdiction. The application is accordingly disposed of. ( R.K. Chief Justice in8h ) Judie IN:S'.i Review Petition No. 4 of 2004 By order dated 15.12.2003 the writ petition flled by the petitioner has been dismissed ira which he sought quashing of cognizance taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate under sections 420, 420/34, 468/34 and 471 IPC. We have clearly held in the order that no illegality had been committed by the learned 'Chief Judicial Magistrate in taking cognizance in the matter. * -a fr rial.ofJer/J Dateoforder Order with Signature office NB{e as to {action(ifany),takenonorder ' We have heard the petitioner who has appeare L . ,- '£ in person. We do not find any cogent and valid reaso to review our order ,dated 15.12.2003. There is no merit in the review petition which i accordingly dismissed. No costs. (R.K. atra) Chief Justice +`J' t` tRTT'slsinghr~ Judge/'t,.a