Debi Prosad Dey, J. - (1.) Challenge in this revisional application is the order dated 8th September, 2017 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, first Fast Track Court, Calcutta whereby and where under learned Judge has dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner for non- prosecution. Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the said order, the appellant/petitioner has preferred this revisional application on amongst other grounds that learned Advocate for the petitioner could not attend the Court and that is why learned Judge has dismissed the appeal for nonprosecution. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner further contended that the appeal cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution since it was incumbent upon the learned first appellate Court to dispose of the appeal on merit. Mr. Asraf Ali appearing on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation contended that several opportunities were given to the appellant to conduct the hearing but the appellant intentionally did not turn up and took successive adjournment only in order to frustrate the cause of justice.
(2.) Mr. Ali further contended that the appellant took the dilatory tactics in order to defer the hearing of appeal.
(3.) On careful scrutiny of the order passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, first Fast Track Court I find that several opportunities were given to the appellant to conduct the hearing of the appeal but the appellant did not turn up on a number of occasions and ultimately was found absent on the date of hearing.;