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 CRI.MISC. APPLICATION NO. 379 OF 2005 CRI.MISC. APPLICATION NO. 379 OF 2005 CRI.MISC. APPLICATION NO. 379 OF 2005 IN CRI.MISC.APPLICATION NO. 378/2005 IN CRI. APPLICATION NO. 1703 OF 2004 Ms. Jyoti Saigal ..Applicant. V/s. Dhiren Mehta & Anr. ..Respondents. ----- Ms. Jyoti Saigal, the Applicant in person. Shri A.G.Lalla for Respondent No.1. Shri A.S.Gadkari, APP for Respondent No.2 -State. ----- CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 16, 2005 DATED : FEBRUARY 16, 2005 DATED : FEBRUARY 16, 2005 PC :- PC :- PC :- . Counsel for the applicant states that respondent No.1 has been duly served. Affidavit of service is tendered. That be filed in the registry. Inspite of the service, none appears for respondent No.1. Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that he has no objection for granting this application in terms of prayer clause (a). As the application has not been contested by the Respondent No. 2, who is appearing for the court and as the averments made in application have remained uncontroverted at the instance of 2 respondent No. 1, the application is granted in terms of prayer clause (a) on condition that the applicant to pay cost to the High Court Legal Service Authority, quantified at Rs. 1000/- in the course of the day, as assured by the counsel for the applicant. On that assurance the restoration application is disposed of by a separate order passed today. . Ordered accordingly. .....