crapln1877.10 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1877 OF 2010 ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ________________________________________________________ Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for respondents. 2 The Counsel for the applicant submits that the Magistrate should not have acquitted or discharged the respondent on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties. The Counsel for the applicant submits that the Advocate for the applicant was not instructed by the complainant to make such a statement before the Court below that the matter crapln1877.10 2 has been settled between the parties. 3 The learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that the applicant / complainant had engaged an advocate and the said advocate was authorized to make statement on behalf of the complainant. He therefore, submits that the statement made on behalf of the applicant was rightly accepted by the Court below and the impugned judgment and order may not be interfered with. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of S. Rama Krishna vs. S. Rami Reddy (D) His Lrs. & ors., reported in 2008(2) Bom.C.R.(Cri.)78 (SC). crapln1877.10 3 4 Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel for respondent, I am of the opinion that it would be appropriate that the complainant should file specific affidavit before this Court stating therein that the Advocate engaged by him was never instructed to make such statement. Such affidavit to be filed by 18th February, 2011, failing which, this application would stand automatically dismissed without further reference to the Court. List this matter on 21st February, 2011. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) 14.02.2011. PLK/*