1 Amk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION 329 OF 2008 Santosh Babanrao Kapadi & Anr. ... Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Ashok P. Jadhav for the applicants. Mr. J.P. Kharge APP for the respondent State. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. Dated :- 29th September, 2009. PC : 01. Criminal Revision Application is filed against the order dated 29th September, 2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nashik thereby acquitting the respondent Nos.7 & 8 from the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further prayed that, the respondent Nos.1 to 6 i.e. Investigating Officers, may be directed to re-investigate the matter. 02. Learned APP appearing for the respondent-State of Maharashtra made statement that, the State has not preferred any appeal against the order of acquittal. 03. It is very sympathetic incident of throwing infant of four months from the second floor and thereby committing his murder. I gone through the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge and also the statement of the mother who was with the child last and she left him in 2 the bedroom for some period and she bolted the said flat from outside and went down to her neighbour. In between, somebody threw the child from second floor and the child succumbed to the injuries. There was enmity between the father of the child and his cousins. The mother has stated that, 15 minutes prior to the incident, she has seen respondent No.7 & 8 going to her flat. However, besides this, there is no evidence before the Court. Moreover, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant could not point out the areas in which the Investigating Officers ought to have been investigated more, so also in other leads which were available to the Investigating Officers but they were exploited or followed by the Investigating Agency. In such circumstances, though the fact, who threw this four years infant from second floor when he was sleeping, remain un-answered only on the ground of suspicious which is based on hostile relationship. 04. No order of re-investigation can be passed. 05. Hence, Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)