IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.539 of 2010 1. RAM PRAVESH SINGH S/O LATE GURUCHARAN SINGH 2. RAMESH SINGH 3. MADAN SINGH S/O RAM PRAVESH SINGH 4. BHOLA SINGH S/O LATE RAM CHANDRA SINGH 5. VINESH SINGH, SON OF RAM PRAVESH SINGH, ALL R/O VILL. MADAI, P.S. CHARPOKHARI, DIST. BHOJPUR AT ARA. --- PETITIONERS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---OPP. PARTY. For the Petitioner : Mr. Vinod Kr. Seth, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyaya, APP ----------- 03 24.06.2010 I.A.No. 853 of 2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Present application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and seeks condonation of delay of about 15 months in filing the Cr. Revision application. Petitioners were found and held guilty under Sections 341, 323/34 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one month under Section 341/34 of the Penal Code and a period of two months for the offence(s) punishable under Section 323/34 of the Penal Code. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment they filed appeal being Cr. Appeal no. 25 of 2000, which was disposed of by order dated 17.10.2008. The appellate Court on reappraisal of evidence dismissed the said appeal. Present criminal revision application seeks to challenge these two judgment(s) and order(s). It is contended that the petitioners were not informed about the disposal of the case. They could learn about the order only when processes were issued against them. The revision 2 application has been lodged in this Court on 15.04.2010 with certain defects. I have carefully gone through the application seeking condonation of delay. To me, it appears that the grounds set out therein are totally vague and deficient. In fact, there is absolutely no explanation to explain the delay of more than a year in filing the case. It appears from the appellate order that the petitioners were duly represented by their counsel. Explanations offered by the petitioners are therefore misplaced. The application seeking condonation of delay is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently the criminal revision application also stands dismissed as barred by limitation. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)