K.T. Thomas, J. - Leave granted.

Twelve persons stand convicted by a Sessions Court under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and all of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. All of them jointly filed an appeal before the High Court of Patna in August, 1986. It appears that the High Court had suspended the sentence passed on the appellants pending disposal of the appeal. On 3.8.1998 the appeal stood listed before a Single Judge of the High Court. But the counsel engaged by the appellants did not turn up and hence learned Single Judge proceeded to hear the counsel for the State alone and then dismissed the appeal on merits. Appellants have therefore come up to this Court aggrieved by aforesaid judgment of the High Court.

2. Shri P.S. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel who argued for the appellants did not endeavour to justify the absence of the counsel for the appellants before the High Court when the case was called for arguments, nor are we interested in knowing why the counsel did not turn up. The appellants should have engaged a responsible counsel to argue their appeal in the High Court, as they now put the blame on the Advocate whom they engag