1 7WP.1927-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1927 OF 2011 M/s. Kishore Thakordas & Co. ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra and another. ..Respondents. .......... Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate a/w. A.H.H. Ponda, for the Petitioner. Mrs. Aruna Pai, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1 – State. Mr. Sathyam Acharya, Advocate for Respondent No.2. .......... CORAM : A. M. KHANWILKAR AND P. D. KODE, JJ. DATED : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Counsel for the Respondents waive notice. 2. By this Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code read with Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, the Petitioner is praying for quashing of C.R. No.I-204/2009 registered with Ulhasnagar police station at Ulhasnagar against the Petitioner herein. It is common ground that the Petitioner – a firm of Advocates and Solicitors practicing in PPD 2 7WP.1927-11 Mumbai, has been named in the complaint lodged with Ulhasnagar Police Station only because a public notice was issued by the Petitioner in stated local newspaper. The public notice indicated that the client of the Petitioner was interested in entering into transaction with regard to the disputed property. We fail to understand as to how this act simplicitor would constitute commission of criminal offence more so offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Notably, the original FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. We are informed by the learned APP that subsequently Section 34 of IPC has been applied by the Investigating Officer. Even so, the question is – how the Petitioner can be held responsible for the alleged offence merely because the Petitioner acted as Advocate of the said party who may be responsible for the situation. 3. We place it on record that Counsel for respondent No.2 in all fairness submitted that the FIR, even if, read by clause by clause or word by word does not disclose commission of offence by the Petitioner herein. 3 7WP.1927-11 4. In the circumstances, Petition ought to succeed and the same is made absolute in terms of prayer clause 19(b). 5. We make it clear that this order will enure only in favour of the Petitioner and will not be of any help to the other accused named in the subject FIR No.I-204 of 2009 registered with Ulhasnagar police station. 6. Petition is disposed of on the above terms. (P. D. KODE, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)