1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 822 OF 2008 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 822 OF 2008 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 822 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 462 OF 2008 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 462 OF 2008 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 462 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.91 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.91 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.91 OF 2008 Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Limited. .. Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents And Sham Gopaldas Ahuja .. Applicant/ Intervenor Mr.S.J.Khanbate with Mr.Akshay Patil & Mr.Fisal Sayed i/b.M/s. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Chitnis i/b.Santosh Bhatagunaki for Respondent No.2. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 3RD JULY, 2008. DATE : 3RD JULY, 2008. DATE : 3RD JULY, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- . This application is for clarification of the order dated 17th April, 2008. The order passed is in the following terms : 2 " Status-quo as regards possession of property existing as on today shall be maintained. However, the assets, if any, taken possession of by the petitioner shall not be sold, alienated or any third party interest created. " 2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the order of this Court that assets, if any, taken possession of by the Petitioner shall not be sold, alienated or created any third party interest, is tried to be misinterpreted in a way that properties which are the subject matter of this Petition i.e. writ petition no. 822 of 2008 are also made subject to this order. We want to clarify that our order dated 17th April, 2008 shall apply with respect to the subject matter of writ petition No.462 of 2008 only. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 submits that the property which are not covered by the present writ petition are covered by the Supreme Court Order in Criminal Special Leave to Appeal No.406 to 409 of 2004. We have only clarified the Order passed by this Court and have no doubt that the order of the Supreme Court will be followed by the 3 concerned parties instead of we clarifying our own order. 3. In view of the above, the Criminal Application No.91 of 2008 does not survive and is disposed of accordingly. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)