(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 101 OF CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 101 OF CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 101 OF 2003 2003 2003 Vijaykumar Balkrishna Agarwal ...Applicant Versus Suresh Jiwanmal Taparia & Anr ...Respondents ..... Mr. K.S. Patil, Adv. for Applicant Mr. M.H. Ramsinghani, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. Rajesh More, A.P.P. for State. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATED: 26TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 26TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 26TH AUGUST, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard Mr. K.S. Patil, the learned advocate for the applicant i.e. original complainant and Mr. Ramsinghani, the learned advocate for respondent No.1 i.e. original accused. The complainant is present in person before the Court. 2. The applicant has preferred this application for setting aside the judgment and order dated 12.11.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2002. 3. Mr. Patil, the learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the parties have entered into consent terms. He has tendered the (-2-) consent terms which is taken on record and marked as Exh.’X’ for identification. Mr. Patil, has submitted that in view of the consent terms, he is not pressing this application. In this view of the matter, this application is disposed of. *****