1 CRI.WP NO.220/1998. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.220/1998. Bhaskar Sonabapu Shahane Age: 52 Yrs., occu. Nil R/o Pathardi, Tq.Pathardi, District Ahmednagar. - PETITIONER VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra. 2) Suresh Pandharinath Babar, Age-Major, occu. Tailoring. 3) Bhujangrao Pandharinath Babar Age:Major, occu.Service. Both r/o Pathardi, Tq.Pathardi, Dist. Ahmednagar. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.Nikhil S.Jaju, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.KM Suryawanshi, APP for State. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 duly served. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 7th January, 2011. PER COURT : 1) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for State. None appears for respondent nos. 2 and 3 though served. 2) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has tendered the copies of orders in Second Appeal 2 CRI.WP NO.220/1998. No.587/2005, including CA No.4056/2005 in the said Second Appeal. He informs that the Second Appeal touches to the same controversy, subject of proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. 3) Learned Counsel has also relied to the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of (2004) 13 SCC 421 – (Mahar Jahan and Ors. Vs. State of Delhi and Ors.), wherein the Apex Court has observed, - “Dispute concerning house property, whether likely to cause breach of peace or simply a civil dispute in reality. 4) In the light of pendency of the Second Appeal, the controversy between the parties has indeed been taken to the civil court and hence, the notices, which are the subject of challenge under Section 145 Cr.P.C., are unwarranted to be issued and to remain in force. Consequently, the impugned order dated 29.11.1991 recorded by the learned Executive Magistrate, Pathardi, is quashed and set aside. 5) The Criminal Writ Petition is allowed to the extent as above. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms. sd/- ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/