- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.W.P.NO.499 OF 1998 Janak Jivanlal Gandhi ..Petitioner Vs. Airport Authority of India and Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr.R.S.Desai Advocate for Petitioner None for Respondent No.1 Mr.D.N.Salvi Advocate for Respondent No.2 .... CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND CORAM: D.G.DESHPANDE AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : APRIL 21,2006 DATE : APRIL 21,2006 DATE : APRIL 21,2006 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr.D.D.Tipnis, Intelligence Officer of Respondent No.2 is present when this order is passed. None appears for Respondent No.1. 2. Sufficient time was given to both sides to take appropriate instructions and make their statements. 3. Now advocate for Respondent No.2 states that since the petitioner himself surrendered the - 2 - medicines after coming to know that one of the ingredients of the medicines was banned, they have no desire or intention to take any criminal action against the petitioner in that regard under any law in existence. 4. The petitioner has no objection if the Respondent No.2 destroyed that drug or medicine in custody of Respondent No.2 because, in any case, life of the drug or medicine has come to an end. 5. The petitioner prays that the amount of Rs.11 lakhs is lying with Respondent No.1 and right to recover that amount or its part, be kept intact. 6. We accept all the above three suggestions and dispose of this petition in view of the above suggestions. The above suggestions shall be treated as part of the order. [D.G.DESHPANDE, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]