Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti, J.:

In the instant revisional application the legality and propriety of the order dated 16.02.2009 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barasat in connection with Rajarhat Police Station Case No. 7 dated 07.01.2004 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code was assailed. On 11.11.2010 this Court passed the following order:

“ Learned lawyer for the State is present. But learned lawyer for the petitioner is found absent on repeated calls and on 14.09.10 also he was found absent on call. Therefore, let the matter go out of list with liberty to mention after one month.

Sd./-(Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti, J.)”

2. Subsequently at the instance of the opposite party the matter appeared in the list of 06.12.2010 for hearing. On that date the learned Advocate for the petitioner was found absent on repeated call but the learned Advocate for the opposite parties and the State were present. Both of them were heard and the revisional application was disposed of by this Court on merit and this Court held that there is no illegality or impropriety in the order of the learned Court below who has rejected the prayer for reinvestigation of the case which