AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
In this application prayer has been made to restore Cr. Misc. No. 10344/92, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 5.12.97.
It appears from the record that Sri. Md. Gulam Gous, was the sole advocate who was appearing for the petitioner in that Cr. Misc. application and the said application was admitted on 14.8.92 further proceeding was stayed. The matter was again pressed on 11.11.97 before a learned Single Judge and on that day even as none appeared, the case was adjourned. On 5.12.97 this case was dismissed as not pressed for none appearance of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
In the instant application, it has been stated that said Md. Gulam Gous joined Judicial Subordinate Service and left the practice in December, 1995 and this fact was not known to the petitioner. He came to know only when warrant of arrest was issued in April, 1999.
It is very common that when a practising advocate is either elevated to the Bench or join the judicial service, he entrust his brief to other Counsel and to that effect an information is given to the client. In this petition, it is nowhere stated that Md. Gulam Gous has not entrusted his brief to any of his colleague. On 14.8.92 stay was granted in Cri. Misc. Case and this restoration application has been filed only on 12.4.99 when this case was dismissed on 5.12.97. It was the petitioner who was to take steps for filing restoration application within time. This has not been done.
I find no merit in this restoration petition. This restoration petition is dismissed.