[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVN.APPLN.NO.108 OF 2008 Shri.Uttam Maruti Kharat ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.Dilip Bodake advocate for applicant Mr.H.J.Dedia A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 26, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard. The applicant-original complainant has preferred this revision against the acquittal of the Respondent Nos.2 to 11-original accused in Sessions Case No.81 of 2006. By judgment and order dated 31.12.2007, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted the Respondents in the said case under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 324, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 149 of IPC and under Section 37(1)(3) r.w. 135 of Bombay Police Act. 2. It may be stated here that the State of Maharashtra, being aggrieved by the very same [-2-] judgment and order of acquittal, had preferred Criminal Application No. 512 of 2008 for leave to file appeal against acquittal of the Respondents. The said matter came up before the Division Bench. By the judgment and order dated 12.6.2008, the Division Bench after considering the matter in depth, rejected the application for leave to file appeal against acquittal on merits. Looking to the above facts, no case is made out for interference, hence, revision application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]