1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRI. REVN. APPLN. NO.: 33 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders. appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. CORAM: S. B. DESHMUKH, J. CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.:33 OF 2010 *** Balasaheb Narayanrao Raner VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Anr *** Mr. Sonpethakar Pradeep N. , Advocate for Petitioner Mr. D. V. Tele, A.P.P. for Respondent/State Authorities. Mr. Sandip Andhale, Advocate h/f Mr. P. R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. *** 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Sonpethkar for the Petitioner, learned A.P.P. Mr. Tele for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Sandip Andhale, counsel holding for Mr. P. R. Katneshwarkar who appears for Respondent No. 2. 2. This criminal revision application appears to have been filed on 22nd January, 2010. Mr. Sonpethkar submits that Revision Petitioner is the original applicant who had lodged complaint with Municipal Council, Parbhani who is Respondent NO.2 in this petition. It was alleged by present 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRI. REVN. APPLN. NO.: 33 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders. appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. CORAM: S. B. DESHMUKH, J. petitioner in that complaint that his compound wall was destroyed by present Respondent NO.2., a private person viz. Gajanan Patki. According to the Petitioner, Respondent NO.2 has committed an offence punishable under sections 53 and 54 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1988. 3. Regular Criminal Case No.605 of 2008 has been decided by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbhani on 21st December, 2009 acquitting the present Respondent NO.2 who was sole accused in the said criminal case. Mr. Sonpethkar submits that said order is challenged by filing appeal before this Court under section 397 of the Cr.P.Code read with section 401. 4. This Court, on 7th April, 2011 after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, issued notice. Learned A.P.P. accepted notice for the Respondent/ State. Notice of 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRI. REVN. APPLN. NO.: 33 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders. appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. CORAM: S. B. DESHMUKH, J. Respondent NO.2 was made returnable on 14th April, 2010. Mr. Andhale is present on behalf of Respondent No.2. He seeks to withdraw the revision application with liberty to file appropriate appeal in view of amended section 372. I have heard learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. In my view, petition can be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty sought for. 5. Revision application stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file appropriate proceedings in view of amended section 372 of Cr.P.Code. No costs. [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.] Dated:29/11/2011. ans/33