1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1404 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 1404 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 1404 OF 2006 Jayant L. Pai & Anr. .... Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & 5 Ors.... Respondents Ms. Ansari Nazneen Yusuf i/b Mr. Amit J. Pai for the Petitioners CORAM : SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI & CORAM : SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI & CORAM : SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI & SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, JJ. SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, JJ. SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, JJ. DATE : 19TH APRIL, 2007 P.C. 1) This petition is being adjourned from time to time at the instance of the petitioners. The 2nd petitioner is an Advocate. He has filed Vakalatnama for the first petitioner. On 4th April one Ms. Tarannum Shaikh appeared for the petitioners and informed this Court that Mr. Amit Pai the 2nd petitioner is unwell. Since the petition was adjourned on several occasions, as a last chance, we adjourned this matter to 11/04/2007. We made it clear that on the next occasion, no adjournment will be granted and the matter will proceed in the absence of the petitioner’s Counsel. 2 2) On 12th April 2007, Ms. Ansari holding for Mr. Amit Pai the 2nd petitioner and Advocate for the 1st petitioner told us that Mr. Amit Pai had met with an accident and he has suffered a fracture and he is admitted in the hospital somewhere at Vile Parle. We therefore placed this matter on 19th April 2007. We recorded the statement of Ms. Ansari that on 19th April 2007 she will let us know in which hospital Mr. Amit Pai is admitted and she will produce the medical certificate. Ms. Tanuja Patil who is appearing in the Court today for the petitioners states that she wants to file Vakalatnama for the petitioners. She feigned ignorance of the earlier order dtd. 12th April 2007. Learned Counsel for respondent no.7 disputed that Mr. Amit Pai has met with an accident and he has suffered a fracture. He submitted that he had seen Mr. Amit Pai in the High Court day before yesterday and the statement that he has suffered a fracture is totally false. Ms. Tanuja Patil is also unable to make a statement that Mr. Amit Pai had suffered a fracture and was admitted in the hospital. Today Mr. Amit Pai is not present. We 3 deprecate this conduct of Advocate, Mr. Amit Pai. Such conduct dis-entitles him and the 1st petitioner from getting any relief from this Court. 3) Petition dismissed. (SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI, J.) (SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI, J.) (SMT. RANJANA P. DESAI, J.) (SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, J.) (SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, J.) (SHRI. D.B. BHOSALE, J.)