IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4622 OF 2005 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. ........ OF 2005 State of Maharashtra .... Applicant Vs. Bharat Narayan Patil & Ors. .... Respondents Ms A.S. Pai, APP, for the Applicant. Shri Sudatta Patil for the Respondents. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & Smt. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: JULY 04, 2007 P.C: P.C: P.C: Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Taking into consideration the medical evidence as well as the testimony of the eye-witnesses to the incident, prima facie it appears that the accused exceeded in the exercise of their private defence and, therefore, the matter requires consideration. Hence, leave is granted in terms of Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. in filing the appeal against the impugned judgment dated 24-2-2005 passed in Sessions Case No.151 of 2001 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli. Accordingly, the appeal stands admitted. Action under Section 390 of the Cr.P.C. to follow. (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.) sjs/J7cag4622.5 sjs/J7cag4622.5 sjs/J7cag4622.5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.222 OF 2005 Babasaheb Ramrao Patil .... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents Shri Jay Shekhar for the Petitioner. Ms A.S. Pai, APP, for the State. Shri Sudatta Patil for the Respondents Nos.2 to 5. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & Smt. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: JULY 04, 2007 P.C: P.C: P.C: In view of the Appeal filed by the prosecution against the impugned judgment having been admitted, question of entertaining the present revision application does not arise. The revision application, therefore, is dismissed. (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.) sjs/J7cag4622.5 sjs/J7cag4622.5 sjs/J7cag4622.5