... 1 ... IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.393 OF 2006 REVISION APPLICATION NO.393 OF 2006 REVISION APPLICATION NO.393 OF 2006 The Union of India ...Applicant Vs. Jayant J. Bhuta ...Respondent Mrs Manjula Rao for the Applicant. Shri Uday Warunjikar for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. : A. S. OKA, J. : A. S. OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : OCTOBER 12, 2006. : OCTOBER 12, 2006. : OCTOBER 12, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the Advocates appearing for the parties. Shri Warunjikar appearing for the Respondent states that the order impugned in this Application cannot be acted upon now in view of the first clause of the said order which required the Respondent to return to India on or before 08th October, 2006. 2. He states that the Respondent will make a fresh Application for similar relief before the learned Magistrate. 3. In view of this statement made by Shri Warunjikar, it is not necessary to entertain this revision Application. The revision Application is accordingly disposed of. If a fresh Application is made by the Respondent, it will be open for the Applicant to contest the same on all permissible grounds. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE