*1* apeal.58.11.appa.390.391.11.sxw kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.58 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra. ..Appellant -Versus- Kamruddin Amruddin Ansari and others. ..Respondents ........... Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State. Mr.Rahul Arote, for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7. .......... CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & A.M.THIPSAY, JJ. Date : 27th April, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard Mrs.Pai, the learned APP for the State. 2 Appeal is admitted against the order of acquittal in toto. 3 Mr.Arote appears for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7. (A.M.THIPSAY, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.) *2* apeal.58.11.appa.390.391.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.391 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.58 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant/Appellant -Versus- Kamruddin Amruddin Ansari and others. ..Respondents ........... Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State. Mr.Rahul Arote, for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7. .......... CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & A.M.THIPSAY, JJ. Date : 27th April, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard Mrs.Pai, the learned APP for the State. 2 The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:- “(a) the dismissal order dated 01.02.2011 be set aside and be pleased to restore Criminal Appeal No.58 of 2011 on file against Respondent/ Orig. Accused No.1 and the same may be heard on merits.” (A.M.THIPSAY, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.) *3* apeal.58.11.appa.390.391.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.390 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.58 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra. ..Applicant/Appellant -Versus- Kamruddin Amruddin Ansari and others. ..Respondents ........... Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State. Mr.Rahul Arote, for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7. .......... CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & A.M.THIPSAY, JJ. Date : 27th April, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard Mrs.Pai, the learned APP for the State. 2 The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:- “(a) Since the notice could not be served upon the Respondent/ Orig. Accused No.1 and non-bailable warrant could not be executed, proclamation against the present Respondent/ Orig. Accused No.1 may be allowed to be published as contemplated under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code.” 3 A copy of the proclamation be placed on record within eight weeks. (A.M.THIPSAY, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)