Question: The main drawback in Rutherford's model of the atom as pointed out by Niels Bohr was that according to Maxwell's equations, a revolving charge experiences a centripetal acceleration hence it must radiate energy continuously as a result of which its kinetic energy is reduced and it eventually should fall into the nucleus. Bohr then proposed his own model in which he explained this through quantum theory stating that the general laws of electrodynamics and classical mechanincs do not apply in the case of electrons.
Does this imply that if a body is revolving around another, then it will tend to spiral in towards the centre? If so, then how is the stability of the solar system explained?

Answer: 
> 
> If so, then how is the stability of the solar system explained?
> 
> 
> 

The solar system bodies are not electrically charged to any significant extent so there is no significant electromagnetic radiation.

However, there is a somewhat analogous mechanism where *gravitational* radiation *can* cause [orbital decay](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave#Orbital_decay_from_gravitational_radiation).

Although this is not significant in our solar system, orbital decay *has* been detected in relativistic systems as a [binary neutron star system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulse-Taylor_binary).
Well the answer to the question asked:

does a charged particle revolving around another charged particle radiate energy?

is simply yes.

Perhaps the "error" in the Rutherford-Bohr-Sommerfeld atoms is the assumption that the electrons are in fact "revolving" about the nucleus.

Remove that revolving, and the need for Hertz-Maxwell radiation, goes away.

Doesn't quantum mechanics remove any revolving; or any other form of charge acceleration in the atom.