IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1357 OF 2007 Pradyamna M. Thackersey & Ors. ...... ......Petitioners V/s The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...... ...Respondents. Mr.Nitin Pradhan with Mr.N.P.Dhilla & Ms.D.Lewish i/by M/s.Hariani & Co., Advs. For the petitioners. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP For the State. Mr.M.I.Siddhiqui, Adv. For respondent No.2. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 18/2/08 PC: This is a criminal writ petition moved by the accused seeking quashing of the proceeding in CR No.118/PW/05 pending on the file of 32nd Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra. The petitioner No.1 who is aged about 85 years and who is said to be bed ridden is a trustee of one Shri Vithaldas D. Thackersey Charitable Trust. The petitioner No.2 as well is trustee of the same trust and petitioner No.3 is the manager looking after the affairs of the said trust. The trust owned some properties and one room premises were occupied by one Hansraj Thakkar as a tenant. The original tenant and his wife expired. Respondent No.2 who is the complainant claims himself to be the legal representative of the tenant and hence claimed tenancy right. The dispute gave rise to the filing of a suit by respondent No.2 bearing RAD Suit No.748/98 in the Court of 1 Small Causes seeking declaration that the respondent No.2 is the tenant of the said premises. The dispute has also given rise to criminal proceedings which are challenged by filing this writ petition. Respondent No.2 filed FIR alleging therein that the belongings kept in the tenanted premises were illegally removed and possession of tenanted room was illegally taken over. Thus an offence punishable under sections 380, 424 and 454 read with section 34 of IPC came to be registered against the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that in substance what is involved in the matter is a civil dispute. It is also contended that the parties have resolved all their disputes amicably and it would be now futile to continue the prosecution moreso, in view of the fact that the petitioner No.1 who is aged about 85 years and is bedridden. Placing reliance on a judgments reported in the case of Indian Oil Corpn. V/s NEPC India Ltd. & Ors., (2006) 6 SCC 736 and B.S.Joshi & Ors. V/s State of Haryana & Anr., (2003) 4 SCC 675 it is submitted that the power and jurisdiction of the High Court under article 227 and section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not curtailed by section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Relying on the said judgment a prayer is made for quashing of the proceedings and/or for permission for compounding the offence. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-complainant also joins in the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that the proceedings be quashed. The complainant- respondent No.2 who is present in the Court unequivocally states 2 that all the disputes inter se between the parties are resolved amicably and parties have placed on record consent minutes of order. Consent minutes of order duly signed by both parties and their respective advocates are taken on record and marked `X' for identification. It is also tried to be demonstrated that there is absolutely no case made out against the present petitioners. The FIR was filed way back in March 1999 in relation to an offence allegedly committed on 1.10.98. As the parties have amicably resolved the dispute and as I am of the view that the dispute predominently is of a civil nature, in my view it would be futile to continue the criminal proceedings and I deem it appropriate in the interest of justice to direct quashing of the proceedings. In the result proceeding in CC No.118//PW/2005 pending on the file of 32nd Metropolitan Magistrate are quashed and set aside. In view of the disposal of writ petition Criminal Application No.315/07 is rendered infructuous and the same also stands disposed of. 18.2.08 3