-:1:- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1416 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 1416 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 1416 OF 2008 Mr. Judah Abraham Massil. ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.. ... Respondents. Mr. Shekhar A. Ingawale for the Applicant. Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. DATE DATE DATE : 18TH JULY, 2008. : 18TH JULY, 2008. : 18TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Heard learned Counsel. 2. By invoking provisions of Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. Applicant is seeking leave to file appeal against the order of learned J.M.F.C., 2nd Court, Thane in S.C.C.No.2493 of 203 dated 1st March 2008 for the offence punishable under Section 427, 447 r/w. 34 of the I.P.C. 3. The original complainant claims that the order under challenge is illegal and perverse. 4. On analysing the judgement of the learned J.M.F.C., Thane coupled with the documents, I find that at Exhibit 31 there is a letter dated 8th April 2003 issued by Honorary Secretary Santosh Menon, of the Society and called upon the complainant to remove the illegal enclosures made by him with steel -:2:- rods/chains at the car parking space. It is curious, the Society has not disputed right of user of the complainant to the parking space, their objection was to the extent of putting chain or enclosing the parking space. The right of user is restricted and does not convey title or absolute possession to the complainant. Requests were made to the complainant since 6 to 8 months prior to 5th April 2003 to remove chains, which he failed to comply. The complainant prosecuted the office bearers for the offence punishable under Sections 427, 447 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. Section 427 contemplates mischief causing damage to the amount of Rs.50/-. While Section 447 provide punishment for criminal trespass. The Office bearers of the society in removing the chain or rod will not be coming by any parameter within the bracket of provisions under Sections 427, 447 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. It is apparent that the office bearer has no personal enmity against the complainant. Since the earlier request, on the part of the Society members having turned down the action contemplated by letter dated 8th April 2003 was put into effect. In the set of facts I do not find any legality in the order of learned J.M.F.C., Thane. 5. Hence, leave to appeal refused. (K.U. (K.U. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.)