IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4568 OF 2010 Abhijit Subhash Gaikwad ..... Applicant V/S. Ganesh Nanasaheb Gaikwad & State of Maharashtra ..... Respondents Mr. Balwant V. Patole i/by. Subhash Hulyalkar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Senior Counsel a/w. Mr. V.B. Naik i/by. Mr. Sukand R. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP for State-respondent no.2. CORAM :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 12th July, 2011. P.C. :- 1. Mr. Patole, appears with a request for adjournment on the ground that advocate Mr. Hulyalkar who has filed the application is in personal difficulty. When the Court is not inclined to adjourn the matter, he makes a request for atleast keeping back the matter. Mr. Mundargi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent points out that the learned advocate for the applicant has not attended a single date of the hearing of the application. Infact, the application was once dismissed for default and got restored by the applicant. The complaint of Mr. Mundargi is justified by the record. Hence, the request of Mr. Patole is declined. He is asked to proceed with the matter. But, Mr. Patole, states that he has no instructions to argue the matter. In that circumstance, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]