1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 2257 OF 2009 Deepak Radharaman Mandal .. Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents. --- Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay, Advocate, i/by M/s. Law Juris for the Petitioner. Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for the Respondents- State. ----- CORAM : J. N. PATEL AND A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. : 1. On 19th November, 2009 this court has passed a specific order for the petitioner to attend the police station. Inspite of the assurance given, the learned counsel for the petitioner takes a stand that the police have failed to take steps to arrest the petitioner though the petitioner is very much available in Mumbai. The petitioner is not even available in the court today. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain this petition as also we do not find any merit in the petition. 2 2. Petition is dismissed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after the petition is dismissed, submits that whether this court can dismiss the petition without hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and ignoring the important facts. This is contemptuous because on earlier occasion this court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at a great length. We, therefore, issue show cause notice to the learned counsel as to why this court should not punish him for contemptuous behaviour in this court. 4. The show cause notice is made returnable on 17.12.2009. 5. Stand over to 17.12.2009. (J.N. Patel,J.) (A.A. Sayed,J.) .....