IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.419 OF 2009 Kirti C. Harsora ...Applicant. v. Hiraman S. Kirve & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr.Sandesh Patil i/by Ajit A. Salvi, advs. For the Applicant. Mr.Sandeep K. Shinde, adv. For the Respondent No.1. Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP for the Respondent No.2/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JUNE 9, 2010 P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the revision applicant points out that in spite of giving reminders to the revision applicant, he could not get any instructions from him. He has also issued notice to him which was also not accepted by the applicant and was returned with endorsement 'refused', therefore, he has requested to be discharged. These facts were noted by this Court in the order dated 10th December, 2009. The learned counsel for the applicant is hereby discharged as in spite of intimation given by the counsel to the applicant, he has not made any alternative arrangement nor he is present today when the matter is called. Revision application is against the concurrent findings of the two Courts below and is not yet admitted. Therefore, revision application stands dismissed for want of prosecution. - 2 - 2 As revision application itself is disposed off and as interim bail granted earlier was also cancelled by the order dated 10th December, 2009, criminal application no.363/09 for bail stands rejected. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)