DCRLR No.11/08 Hon’ble Dharam Veer J. (CRMA No.109/2008) Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. GA for the State, are present. I have perused the application filed by learned counsel for the revisionist. There is delay of 324 days in filing the revision. Notices were sent to the respondents. Notices were served on respondent no.2 and the power was filed on behalf of respondent no.2 by Sri Sajjad Ahmad, Advocate who is not present in the court and no objection was filed in the delay condonation application. The grounds shown in the affidavit filed along with the delay condonation application are sufficient to condone the delay. The delay in filling the revision has been explained by sufficient cause. The delay condonation application is allowed. Delay is hereby condoned. I have also perused the judgment and order dated 18.01.2007 passed by III FTC Court/Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No.279/2004 State Vs. Kashiram. Admit. Summon the lower court’s record. Issue fresh notices to respondent no.2 returnable within four weeks. List thereafter in due course. (Dharam Veer J.) 19.06.2008 Arti