1 (APPLN 3583/10) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3583 OF 2010 Shri Avadhoot Purushottam Nadkarni .... Applicant. V/s Hiraji Ramchandra Raut & Ors. ..... Respondents. Mr. V.K. Kocharekar i/b Mr. Prakash Vare for the applicant. Mr. A.S. Shitole, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 27th September, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant. 2 The complaint filed by the applicant for the offence punishable under sections 420, 341, 504, 506 read with section 34 and section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code was dismissed by the learned Magistrate after perusing the report filed by the police under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Against this order, the applicant preferred revision application in the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court also has, by a well reasoned order, dismissed the revision application. 3 The grievance of the applicant is that the accused had 2 (APPLN 3583/10) entered into an agreement giving extra FSI which would be available after the set back area is surrendered by the owner. In the meantime, however, the Respondent No.1 who is the owner of the property entered into individual agreements with the tenants in respect of their individual flats. It is alleged that by entering into these agreements with tenants of the Society, Respondent No.1 has committed an offence of cheating. 3. Both the Courts below have observed that the agreements executed with the tenants are in respect of their respective rooms and not in respect of the set back area and, therefore, have held that no case of cheating is made out. In my view, taking into consideration the concurrent findings given by both the Courts below, this is not a fit case for interfering with the impugned order while exercising inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 4. Application is accordingly dismissed. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3 (APPLN 3583/10)