* 1 * W.P. 2881.2010 22.11.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2881 OF 2010 Mr. Rajesh Pratap Sainani & Others ... Petitioners v/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. .. Respondents * * * * Mr. Prashant M. Patil h/f. Mr. Kuldeep Patil, Advocate for the petitioners. Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for State-respondent no.1. Mr. A.H. Ponda, Advocate for respondent no.2. CORAM :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 22 November, 2010. P.C. :- 1. Mr. Ponda, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes in all fairness that the order impugned in the petition dated 20th August, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Bombay in Criminal Revision Application No.87 of 2009 cannot be sustained as the petitioners had not been impleaded to the revision application and that the order had been passed behind their back. In view of the concession, the petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The judgment and order dated 20th August, 2009 passed by the learned 4th Ad-Hoc * 2 * W.P. 2881.2010 22.11.2010 Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Bombay in Criminal Revision Application No.87 of 2009 is set aside. Mr. Ponda, makes a statement that respondent no.2 will file an application for impleading the petitioners to the criminal revision application within a period of one week from today. The learned counsel for the petitioners, states that, since the petitioners already have a copy of Criminal Revision Application No.87 of 2009 they will not insist for formal notice of the criminal revision application to be served upon them after it’s amendment. The Sessions Court, Bombay is directed to dispose off Criminal Revision Application No. 87 of 2009 afresh on/or before 31st January, 2011 after its amendment. Both the parties agree to appear before the Sessions Court on 30th November, 2010. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]