... 1 ... IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.92 OF 2002 REVISION APPLICATION NO.92 OF 2002 REVISION APPLICATION NO.92 OF 2002 ..................................................... .................................................... .................................................... Office Office Office Notes, Office Memoranda Notes, Office Memoranda Notes, Office Memoranda of of of Coram, apperances, Court’s Coram, apperances, Court’s Coram, apperances, Court’s Court’s Court’s Court’s or or or orders orders orders or directions & Registrar’s Judge’s orders or directions & Registrar’s Judge’s orders or directions & Registrar’s Judge’s orders orders. orders. orders. ...................................................... ...................................................... ...................................................... Shri. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Applicant. Ms M.H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : JULY 19, 2005. : JULY 19, 2005. : JULY 19, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Revision Application is filed by the original complainant for challenging the order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate by which the Respondent No.1 was acquitted of the offence punishable under section 324 of the Indina Penal Code. 2. The scope of the Revision Application is very limited. After hearing the Counsel for the Applicant, I find that the learned Magistrate has considered the entire evidence on record. There is no perversity in the findings recorded by the learned Judge. There is no menifest error of law. Hence, there is no merit in the Revision Application and the same is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE