AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 195 wordsH.P. Sandesh, J
The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. This Court vide order dated 11.02.2025 observed that the sentence of the petitioner was suspended vide order dated 16.12.2021 subject to depositing of 50% of the fine amount, including the amount which is already deposited, within a period of four weeks and emergent notice was also ordered against the respondent. This Court also taken note that on 13.01.2022 also the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent and on 08.01.2025 though this Court re-issued notice to the respondent, P.F. was not paid and hence the same was not issued. On the previous occasion also, the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. However, in the ends of justice the learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to pay the P.F. within one week. It was made clear that if P.F. is not paid within one week, list the matter for dismissal.
Inspite of the said order, the learned counsel for the petitioner is not pursuing the matter diligently from 2021 after obtaining the order of suspension of sentence. Hence, the criminal revision petition is dismissed in view of the order dated 11.02.2025.