IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17665 of 2009 Raj Kumar Sinha, son of Binod Kumar Sinha, resident of Nagar Nausa Kothi, Makhania Kuan Road, PS Pirbahore, District Patna – Petitioner. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Sangeeta Sinha, wife of Rajiv Kumar Sinha, daughter of Swarn Kumar, resident of 15, Circular Road, Anand Bazar, PS Danapur, District Patna – Opposite parties. 2 14.9.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed against the order, dated 5.1.2009 by which Criminal Revision No. 135/2008 has been dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation of 716 days. The petitioner in this case has tried to explain the delay by stating that he was residing in Ranchi and had no knowledge about the order under challenge in the revision application and as such the limitation should be condoned. The order of the court below indicates that after filing of the revision application counsel for the petitioner did not appear and the case was dismissed for non-prosecution. The petitioner has to appear physically for the purpose of framing charge which he has been avoiding by filing one revision after the other. In the circumstances I see no reason to interfere with the order of the court below. This application is dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)