1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Criminal Revision Application No. 236 OF 2008 Mahadeo S/o Vishwanath Aaglawe ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others. ... Respondents. -------- Shri. A.S. Usmanpurkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri. B.J. Sonwane, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL J DATE: 29th AUGUST 2009 PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) Learned counsel submitted that, the Sessions Judge, Jalna by Judgment and order dated 21-03-2009 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 137/2008 remanded the matter to the Trial Court in respect of sentence passed against Accused 2 Shivaji. Accordingly the Trial Court called report from the District Probation Officer, U/sec. 4(2) of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and after considering the report and hearing the accused, the Trial Court by order dated 02-06-2009 granted benefit of Probation Act to the Accused Shivaji by directing to pay compensation of Rs. 200/- to the complainant. 3) In this Criminal Revision Application the Petitioner challenges order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Partur, Dist. Jalna dated 02-08-2008. 4) I have considered the judgment and order of the Trial Court. After appreciating the evidence the Trial Court reached appropriate conclusion and passed order of conviction against Accused Shivaji. 5) Recovery of stick was not established. There were eye witnesses. Considering the medical evidence / report and the deposition of Dr. Jayshree, the trial court reached appropriate conclusion and convicted and sentenced the 3 accused Shivaji. 6) In exercise of jurisdiction U/Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C., I do not find that, this is a fit case for causing interference. 7) The Criminal Revision Application stands dismissed. (NARESH H PATIL, J.) sdm/ Cri.rev.Appln.236.08 4