IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR APPL (DB) No 710 of 2011 Om Prakash Singh, son of Raj Kishore Singh, resident of village – Tihia Dihari, Police Station – Kaira, District – Jamui - Appellant Versus The State of Bihar - Respondent ----------- 3 26.08.2011 It is unfortunate that lawyers, who are supposed to be officers of the Court and are supposed to be vigilant when they take up matters in the Court, act in the most casual and irresponsible manner. In a Sessions Trial, several persons were convicted. One of them filed an appeal before this Court being Cr Appeal No 310 of 2011 on 13.04.2011 alongwith certified copy of the judgment under appeal. That matter was taken up and lower Court records were called for in respect of plea for bail. Subsequently, one Om Prakash Singh, who was also convicted, filed another appeal being Cr Appeal No 675 of 2011 on 18.07.2011 alongwith an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal as the appeal time had expired long back, it being 60 days only. As no certified copy of the judgment under appeal was filed, by orders of this Court, it was got dispensed with in view of the certified copy being available in the earlier filed criminal appeal being Cr Appeal No 310 of 2011. It is most unfortunate that once again on behalf of the said Om Prakash Singh, another criminal appeal was filed from the same Sessions Trial on 26.07.2011. This matter was then listed before us and the learned lawyer pointed out as if it had been listed for filing of certified copy of the judgment under appeal. It was pointed out that the certified copy was available in Cr Appeal No 675 of 2011 and, 2 as such, it was dispensed with. Today, the office has placed this matter before us having found that this appellant had earlier filed Cr Appeal No 675 of 2011 and no second appeal was maintainable. Today, learned lawyer for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal. We feel all this could have been avoided if the lawyer was more vigilant in taking up stale matters and exercised due discretion in the matter. We feel that like bail matters, so in criminal appeals, whether before Single Judge or Division Bench, when the matters are to be placed before the Bench, there should be a reporting of similar matters arising from same Police Station Case number/Sessions Trial number with result of the bail application therein duly reported for the perusal of the Court hearing the matter. However, in view of the apology tendered by the learned counsel, we take no further action. We permit him to withdraw Cr Appeal No 710 of 2011 as not maintainable in the circumstances, noted above. This appeal is dismissed, as not maintainable. In view of our recommendation of reporting, as above, place this matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for necessary orders on the administrative side. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh) (Ashwani Kumar Singh)