It is submitted that Cr.Revision no.172/1999(R) was filed against the order of conviction passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court. That the case was listed for final hearing on 16.01.2015. That the Advocate-on-record did not appear on repeated calls hence the aforesaid revision was dismissed for non-prosecution. That the order of dismissal of Cr.Revision no.172/1999(R) was received in the court of S.D.J.M, Garhwa and by order dated 12.03.2015 the petitioner was noticed but without any service report non-bailable warrant was issued on 11.05.2015 which would be evident from the order-sheets at Annexure-1 to the present interlocutory application. That the petitioner came to know about the dismissal of the Cr. Revision when the police started searching for him for execution of the warrant of arrest. Thereafter, the petitioner came to the High Court and engaged another lawyer who inspected the record and informed him that the conducting counsel had not appeared in this case as such the revision was dismissed. It is submitted that there has been no intentional or deliberate laches on the part of the petitioner rather the conducting counsel never informed him about the dismissal of the revision. It is submitted that the petitioner has a good case and if the delay in filing the Cr.M.P. for restoration of the aforesaid revision is not allowed the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
