APPR.389-10 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 389 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 639 OF 2007 Mrs. Shalini Vithal Mane & Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents AND Mr. Namdeo Bhiva Mane & Ors. ... Applicants *** Mr. C. R. Sonawane, for the Applicant. Mr. A. S. Shitole, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. K. S. Patil, for Respondent No.2. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : DECEMBER 14, 2010 P.C. 1. Respondent No.2 in Criminal Revision Application expired during pendency of the revision application. Her heirs, therefore, have filed this application for bringing them on record. 2. Respondent No.2 is the original complainant who had filed APPR.389-10 - 2 - the complaint against the Petitioners herein which complaint was allowed and the petitioners herein convicted by the trial Court. The appeal was, however, partly allowed. Against the said order, the petitioners have preferred the criminal revision application and pending the revision application, respondent No.2 has expired. 3. In my view, the heirs of respondent No.2 are entitled to be brought on record. Hence, criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The petitioners shall carry out amendment in the revision application and bring the applicants (legal heirs of respondent No.2) on record within 4 weeks from today. The criminal application is accordingly disposed of. [ V. M. KANADE J.]