IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21678 of 2009 KASHI PRASAD JAISWAL @ KASHI PRASAD JAISUL & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 04.11.2009 This is an application for restoration of Cr. Misc. No.46814 of 2008, which was dismissed vide order dated 12.05.2009 on the ground that it was the specific direction of this Court on the previous date that no further adjournment will be given. Learned counsel on record did not argue the case and he prayed for an adjournment which was not granted and considering the view that no interest was the being taken in arguing the case the same was dismissed as not pressed. On perusal of the record of the said Cr. Misc. No. 46814 of 2008, it appears that the case was firstly taken up on 10.04.2009 but a prayer for adjournment was made and the Court granted adjournment with a categorical direction that no further adjournment will be granted on the next date. On 12.05.2009 when the case was taken up again one of the learned counsel Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha-2 on record appeared and he did not argue the case and he again prayed for an adjournment. Considering the antecedents of the case in the matter of seeking adjournment and the repeated specific direction of this Court that no 2 further adjournment will be given, this Court felt that since the case was not being argued it was dismissed as not pressed. Today restoration of the case is pressed on the ground that the another arguing counsel Mr. Naresh Kumar Malhotra who was also holding Vakalatnama and who had to argue the case was ill. But that plea does not even appear to have been taken on the date of dismissal. Moreover when on earlier two dates there were specific directions that no further adjournment will be given it was expected that the petitioner must be ready by engaging counsel who was ready to argue this case. Thus considering the matter, I find no scope to consider the prayer for restoration. Accordingly, the prayer for restoration is rejected. Mkr. ( C.M. Prasad, J.)