:1: :1: :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4663 OF 2003 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.454OF 2003 1. Sou. Sunita Shankar Mahangare and anr. .. Applicants Vs 1.Shri Shankar Dagadu Mahangare & Anr Respondents Shri Pratap Patil i/b Mr K.V.Saste, for the applicants. Respondent no.1, though served, remained absent. CORAM : S.B.MHASE & CORAM : S.B.MHASE & CORAM : S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. DATE : April 19, 2005. DATE : April 19, 2005. DATE : April 19, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Mr Patil, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. The respondents, though served, remained absent. Since the averments made in the application are not controverted, they have to be accepted, being supported by the affidavit. We find that the delay has been properly explained. The delay is,hereby, condoned. The civil application is disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) /rrt/db-05/db-19405/appln4663-03