The Court was considering a plea challenging an order passed by a Magistrate court in a case in which the petitioner was the accused.
The petitioner alleged that the Magistrate court order had condoned the delay in filing by the complainant, even though no plea was filed to condone the delay. It was also contended that was no sufficient cause and notice to the accused.
On this ground, he also sought to quash all proceedings against him before the Magistrate court.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that the delay petition had no seal and also that court fee had not been remitted.
Therefore, the delay petition is a fabricated one as Rules 28 (Date stamping of papers and initiating of FIR by Magistrates) and 29 (Cancellation of stamps) of the Criminal Rules of Practice have been not complied with, it was argued.
Source: Barandbench
