1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 815 OF 2009 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 816 OF 2009 Babulal Kapoorchand Kothari ..Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. A. K. Prajapati i/b. M/s. K. R. Tiwari & Co. for Petitioner. Ms. Mallika Ingale for Respondent No. 2. Mrs. A. A. Mane – APP for State. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : 6TH OCTOBER, 2009. P.C. : 1. The petitioner has challenged the Orders of the Metropolitan Magistrate Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Bombay, dated 28th August 2007 dismissing his complaints and the Common Order dated 29th September 2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, dismissing his Revisions on the ground that the petitioner had earlier compounded the same complaints. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner 2 denies the fact that the earlier complaints were compounded by him since according to the learned counsel the petitioner has not signed the applications for compounding. However, it appears that the petitioner had filed applications in writing on 4th June 2007 and had voluntarily compounded the offences. The learned Magistrate has recorded accordingly. There is no material placed before this court to show that the petitioner did not appear before the Magistrate before the Magistrate recorded the order of compounding offence. 3. From the facts it appears that the petitioner’s grievance is about being asked to vacate a gala which is owned by the respondent No. 2. According to the petitioner he has been cheated by the respondent No. 2. In fact it further appears from paragraphs 12 and 13 of the petitions that the petitioner’s case is that he was assured by the respondent No. 2 that he would make the payment of Rs.11,00,000/- to the petitioner and the petitioner having been cheated, had no alternative but to file fresh criminal complaints, clearly suggest that there were earlier complaints. There are no grounds raised in the petitions that any fraud was played in respect of the earlier compounding of offences. In the circumstances, there is no merit in the petitions, which are hereby dismissed. (S. A. BOBDE, J.)