1 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1099 OF 1997 Sharifa D. Khatri & Ors. .. Petitioners V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. A.S. Khandeparkar for the petitioners. None for respondent no.1. Ms. A.T. Jhaveri, A.P.P. For the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 P.C. : 1. By this petition, the petitioners challenge the order dated 14th December 1990 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 41st Court, Shindewadi, Dadar directing issuance of process (summons) to the petitioners. 2. The impugned order is passed on 14th December 1990. The writ petition has been filed in October 1997, that is after a lapse of 7 years. However, that is not the only ground on which I am inclined to dismiss the petition. The petitioners have acquiesced to the order of issuance of process. 2 In fact, they made two applications on 22nd March 1996 and 26th July 1996 for discharge inter alia on the ground that the trial has not proceeded for a considerable period of time and, therefore, that has caused prejudice to the petitioners. Those applications were rejected on 29th August 1997. Though the present petition has been filed after the rejection of the application for discharge, the petitioners have not challenged the order passed by the Magistrate refusing to discharge them. That is an additional ground on which the petition deserves to be dismissed. 3. The petitioners were previously carrying on business of manufacture of wooden hangers after obtaining necessary licence from the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. The licence expired on 31st March 1989. The petitioners applied for renewal of licence as also for change of business, from hanger making to automobile service station. The application was not granted. According to the petitioners, the officers of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation did not act upon their application for renewal of licence causing harassment and, therefore, they were required to start the business of Maruti Service Station without permission of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation thereafter filed complaint before the Magistrate for carrying on the business without a valid licence which is an offence punishable under section 390 read with section 471 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. Admittedly, the petitioners were carrying on the 3 business without licence. The old licence was not renewed. The petitioners were required to obtain fresh licence for the new business. They carried on the new business without a valid licence and, therefore, there was prima facie material before the Magistrate of commission of the offence under section 390 read with section 471 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the prosecution was vexatious and without any merit. The Magistrate was justified in issuing of the process. Consequently there is no merit in the petition which is hereby dismissed. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)