IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2011 DILIP MANGAONKAR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr. Sanjeev Punalekar, Advocate for the applicant. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 9th March, 2011 P.C. Heard Mr. Punalekar, learned Counsel for the applicant. 2. By this revision application, the applicant against whom charge has been already framed under Sections 16, 18 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, challenges the order dated 27th August, 2010 by which the learned Sessions Judge, South Goa, Margao has ordered framing of the charge against the applicant under the aforesaid Sections. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant does not dispute that the the applicant did not seek stay of the said order nor of the further proceedings in Special Case bearing No.1/NIA/10. Learned Counsel does not dispute that after the passing of the said order, the prosecution has examined 19 witnesses in support of the prosecution. 4. In view of the above position, I am not inclined to exercise revisional jurisdiction against the impugned order framing charge against the applicant for the aforesaid offences. Hence, the revision application is dismissed. Needless to mention that all the contentions of the applicant on merits are kept open. 5. The revision application stands disposed of. A. P. LAVANDE, J. SMA