K. Harilal, J.

1. The Revision Petitioner is the de facto complainant in C.C. No.494 of 2010 on the files the of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mannarkkad. The Respondents 2 to 15 are the accused in the above case. The allegation against the respondents is that they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of that unlawful assembly, attacked the de facto complainant and caused damages to him. Thus the offence alleged against them are punishable under Sections 143,148,448,427, 506(iii) read with 34 IPC. On the complaint, the police registered a crime for the said offence and filed the final report charging the respondents for the said offence. After trial, the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondents; but the State has not preferred an appeal against the acquittal. In that context, the Revision petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C before the Sessions Court with a petition to condone delay of 725 days in filing the appeal as Crl.M.P. No. 1647 of 2012. After considering the grounds raised in the said petition, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition to condone delay. Consequently, the appeal also was dismissed. Both o