JUDGMENT 1. The Petitioner, a writer-Constable at Darjeeling, was convicted under sec. 29 of the Police Act (V of 1861). He obtained leave for six months and it is said that a year's leave was due to him. After the expiry of the period of his leave, be applied for an extension. He came down to Calcutta to get money from a Bank in which he had deposited his savings. He had to wait here for the Directors' meeting which was put off from time to time and he accordingly applied for an extension of his leave. He was asked to submit a medical certificate. He represented that he was not ill but was detained in Calcutta for the business mentioned above. He was then called upon to join his appointment, and went back. 2. He had to settle his affairs in the Bank at a considerable sacrifice. It is stated that he had Rs. 2,000 due to him and he had to settle it for Rs. 1,100. For a person in his position, it was no doubt a great hardship. 3. The question is whether the Petitioner had reasonable cause for overstaying his leave. 4. Without laying down what constitutes reasonable cause under sec. 29 of the Act, it cannot be said that in this case the Petitioner failed without reasonable cause to report himself to duty on the expiration of his leave. In these circumstances, we think that the conviction of the Petitioner under sec. 29 of the Police Act and the sentence passed upon him must accordingly be set aside. The Petitioner will be discharged from his bail bond.