1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 263 OF 2008 Narendra S/o Dodhu Akalade ... Petitioner. Versus Gulab Waman Akalade & Others. ... Respondents. -------- Shri. N.B. Suryawanshi Advocate for the petitioner. Shri. S.D. Kaldate, Additional Public Prosecutor, for Respondent No. 3 State. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL, J. DATE: 29th AUGUST 2009 PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) Learned Counsel Mr. N.B. Suryawani has filed present Criminal Revision application against the Judgment and order dated 23-09-2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Session Case NO. 86/2007. 3) The learned Counsel submitted that the trial Court committed error in acquitting the accused 2 which has caused serious prejudice to the complainant. There is cogent and reliable evidence to convict the accused persons according to the Counsel. 4) I have perused the Judgment and order, I find that, the evidence was properly appreciated by the Trial Court. In the light of the evidence led, the trial Court adopted a possible view which is just and does not call for any interference. 5) The trial Court has considered the reasons for alleged quarrel and held that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused U/Sec. 306/34 of Indian Penal Code. For lack of good and sufficient evidence the trial Court acquitted the accused persons. 6) Considering the scope and ambit of revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code. I do not find any justifiable reasons for causing interference in the order of acquittal. 7) The Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. (NARESH H PATIL, J.) sdm/ cri.rev.263.08 3 4