IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15343 of 2009 MOHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2 21.4.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The instant application is directed for restoration of Cr.Rev. No.657/06, which was dismissed for default due to non appearance of the counsel for the petitioner vide order dated 27.8.08 passed by Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ghanshyam Prasad, as his Lordship then was. The learned counsel submits that no merit was considered while dismissing the application and as such , it appears that the aforesaid revision application was dismissed for default. It is difficult for me to accept the contention of the petitioner in view of the last paragraph of the order dated 27.8.2008 passed in the aforesaid Cri.Revision No.657/06 which is quoted hereinbelow:- “ Having regard to the facts and circumstances, this application is dismissed and the court below is dir- ected to take steps in accordance with law for pay- ment of the maintenance amount to the opposite party no.2” Before passing the aforesaid order this Court had observed that the learned Judge has observed that no one appeared despite repeated calls. On earlier occasion also no one had appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 2 In view of the aforesaid circumstance, I am not in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid Cr.Revision application was dismissed for non-prosecution alone. As such, this application is dismissed as not maintainable. Anilkrsinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)