- 1 - Criminal Revision Application No.71/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.71 OF 2010 Mrs. Padminbai Dashrath Zanzane ... PETITIONER VERSUS Tuljiram Haribhau Zanzane & ors. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri M.A. Tandale, Advocate for applicant – absent. Shri S.J. Salunke, Advocate for Respondents 1 to 4 Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for Respondent No.4. ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 21st February, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Counsel for the revision applicant absent.. 2. Challenge to the acquittal for an offence under Section 286 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4(a) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 would be, in terms of Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Proviso), which reads as under : - 2 - Criminal Revision Application No.71/2010 “Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.” 3. In the light of this legal position, revision is not maintainable. It is disposed of. Liberty to take appropriate proceedings. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/crra71.10