IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.546 OF 2002 The Associated Advertising P.Ltd. ...Applicant Versus Madhukar Raghunath Khanwalkar & Anr....Respondents ...... None for Applicant. Mr.Deepak Girme with Mr.K.S.Patil for Respondent No.1. Mr.A.S.Gadkari, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. MARCH 28, 2005. MARCH 28, 2005. MARCH 28, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 states that Revision has become infructuous, inasmuch as during the pendency of this Revision Application, Appeal preferred by the accused has been decided in favour of the accused by recording acquittal on 26th July 2004. Perhaps, for that reason, none appears for the Applicant. : 2 : 2. Even assuming that the matter has become infructuous, that does not absolve the Advocate on record for the Applicant from appearing before the Court when the matter is listed. 3. Be that as it may, Application is dismissed for non-prosecution. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.