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.186 OF 2003 REVISION APPLICATION NO.186 OF 2003 REVISION APPLICATION NO.186 OF 2003 Balwant Laxman Pachpute. ... Applicant. Versus. Vijay Raosaheb Mandhare & others. ... Respondents. Ms.R.S.Sawant i/by Shri Rahul S.Kate for the Applicant. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. : ABHAY S. OKA, J. : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 18th August, 2005. : 18th August, 2005. : 18th August, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. This Revision Application has been filed by the original Complainant for challenging the impugned Judgment and Order by which the Respondents Nos.1 to 4 were acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 304-B, 306, and 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. With the assistance of the learned Advocate for the Applicant I have gone through the impugned Judgment and Order. A perusal of the impugned Judgment and order shows that the learned Addl.Sessions Judge has considered all the oral and documentary evidence on record. After considering the evidence of the Applicant, who was P.W.1, P.W.2 Lalita and P.W.3 Dr.Ghotwadekar, the learned Judge has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has not established the guilt of the Respondents Nos.1 to 4. : 2 : 2 : 2 : 3. After having heard the learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant, i find that there is no manifest illegality or procedural irregularity committed by the learned Judge. The learned Judge has appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. It is not open to reappreciate the evidence in Revision Application. There is no merits in the Revision Application. The same is rejected. Judge. Judge. Judge.