[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVN.APPLN.NO.226 OF 2008 Shri.Yadunath Joma Mhatre ..Applicant Vs. Chandravardhan @ Chandya Prabhakar Mhatre and Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.Shreekant V.Gavand advocate for Applicant Mr.Kuldeep S.Patil Adv. for Respondent nos.1, 3 & 4 Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa 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 : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicants-original complainant, learned advocate for the respondent nos.1, 3 and 4-original accused and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. By judgment and order dated 6.3.2008, the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (I) Raigad convicted respondents-accused mainly under Section 307 of IPC in Sessions Case No. 56 of 2005. Being aggrieved by the quantum of sentence, the applicant has preferred this revision. [-2-] 3. Being aggrieved by the quantum of sentence, the State of Maharashtra has preferred Criminal Appeal No.1003 of 2008. The said matter was heard by the Division Bench and by order dated 14.11.2008, the Division Bench rejected the said Appeal for enhancement of sentence. In this view of the matter, I see no reason to entertain the present application, hence, revision application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]