1 wp3557.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 3557 of 2010 Sheshnarayan Arjunprasad Pandey ..Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra & anr. ..Respondents Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab – advocate for the petitioner. Ms. SeemaRawade – advocate for BMC. Mr. P.A. Pol – PP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ DATED :- DECEMBER 13, 2010. P.C. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner on instructions states that the Petitioner is willing to pay the deficit octroi duty forthwith and would undertake to pay the penalty amount as and when demanded, after complying with the formalities expounded in the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sushmita Sen v/s. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and anr. reported in 2008 (2) Mh. L.J. 2 wp3557.10.sxw 42. 2. In view of this statement, Learned Counsel for the Corporation submits that the vehicle in question will be released on payment of octroi duty as payable by the Petitioner and demanded by the Corporation, without prejudice to the option available to the Corporation to prosecute the Petitioner and then demand the penalty amount after the Petitioner is convicted in the said prosecution. 3. In view of the above, nothing survives for consideration in this Petition, as the Corporation is willing to return the vehicle to the Petitioner subject to necessary compliances to be made by the Petitioner, unless the vehicle is required in connection with some other case. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)