1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 471 of 2009 (Asif Shaikh Ibrahim Shaikh and ors. .vs. State of Mah. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. E.W. Nawab, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. C.N. Adgokar, APP for Respondent. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : JUNE 19, 2009 Heard. The learned counsel for the applicants seeks withdrawing the petition with a liberty to file appropriate petition. The learned counsel urged that applicants no.1 to 5 were convicted and sentenced for commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 506 (II) and 323 read with section 34 of IPC vide a judgment and order dated 1.9.2006 passed by the learned JMFC, Court No.6, Nagpur in Regular Criminal Case No. 152 of 2001 2 registered upon the charge sheet filed by the Police Station, Sadar as a result of the investigation of complaint lodged by applicant no.6 who is wife of applicant no.1 and related with applicants no. 4 to 5. In view of the settlement arrived thereafter in between applicants no.1 to 5 and applicant no.6, an application was preferred by them for permission to compound the offences for which applicants no.1 to 5 were convicted and sentenced in Criminal Appeal No.228 of 2006 preferred by applicants no.1 to 5 in Court of Session at Nagpur. However, the said application was rejected by order dated 18.11.2008 passed by the learned D.J. 7 and A.S.J. Nagpur who was seized with the said appeal on the count of relevant offences being non-compoundable. He has further urged the same has necessitated the applicants to approach this Court for putting an end to the prosecution of applicants no.1 to 5 by seeking appropriate order for giving the effect to settlement arrived in between them. However, after preferring present petition applicants having realized that a petition preferred by them being not of appropriate nature the same will not serve the purpose for which they have intended to approach this Court. 3 Hence they are seeking for withdrawal of the petition preferred with a liberty to prefer appropriate petition. The learned APP has not objected the request made on behalf of the applicants on any count. Now after taking into account the nature of the petition preferred by the applicants i.e. the same being preferred for the limited purpose for quashing and setting aside order dated 18.11.2008 passed rejecting their application for compounding made by them before the appellate Court in appeal preferred by applicants no. 1 to 5 against the order of their conviction, there appears substance in the submission canvassed by the learned counsel for the applicants. The same is obvious as even apparently no fault can be found with the order impugned in petition in view of the offences in question being not compoundable even with the permission of the Court. Apart from the same hardly any sufficient material has been placed before this Court enabling the Court to examine the merits of a prayer for which the applicants in reality had intended to approach this Court. Thus manifestly it is clear that present petition preferred by the applicants is unlikely to serve any fruitful purpose 4 much a less a real purpose for which the applicants had approached the Court. In view of the same, the prayer for withdrawal made with a liberty as prayed deserves to be accepted for serving the ends of justice. The application stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. JUDGE halwai