^: liffii;Kl^i: ^^.1-° HIGH COURTOFCHHATTIseARHATBILASPUR Criminal Revjsion (PRlNo.950_of_20iO ApoiJcant Mon-aDpfJcants The Staie of Chhattisaarh, Throuah - Dlstricf ?v1agistrate, Jaahpur (C.G.) Versus Rakiishore Sharma (@ Raiu Sharma. Si'o.-Harinarayan Singh Sharina Agsd about - 30 Yesrs Caste - Bhumihar R/o.-Ahivagur, Near Baza.r Samiti.. iViUJSTTSi"pUf (Bihar) (23 snown AL.A iii^ impugned order') 2. Raikishore Sharma. @ Raju, S/o.- M<.—^r—— /?:<».-^L. ^t-——,.— A—.-.JI^i»«...A ^Sif\ Nsrsysn bingF) bnsfms Agec SDOU? — *.?u Years R/o.-Dhanushi. P.S.-Hathod .A.hivaDur. Near Bazar Sarniti. District — Mujaffarpur (Bihar) (as shown in the chaiian) Crimina! aooea! under section 397/401 ofthe Cr.P.C,) SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P, Sharma.J. Mr.Pradeep Singh, Panei lawyer for the Sta.te.i'appi'icant,. JUDGMENT (ORAL1 <S3——----i -^—^^n ?>.«-!.s-_~i-; ^Arfft^ (fasssa on d"a~" it'iarcn, 'iiu'iuj 1- This revision "etition is listsd on account of defaults Dointed out bv Reaistn'. <=>-•-—*. 2. ! have heard iearned counsel for the anDiicant. Derused the t'evision oent'on a.nd the ordar imDuaned. 3. Learneo' counsel for the aDDlicant is not in a Dosition to satisf'/ that whv the Court below has committed i!!eaa!itv jn not framina the cha.rae of Sectlon 3 of the Uniawfu! Activitiss fpreyention) Act. 1967. 4. On due cons'deration. th®a"Dlication for condonation of delav in fj!in" the revision is herebv condoned and the revision Detition is dismissed a.t the motion steae itseif, Sd/- T.P.Sharma Judge B/-