sk 1 caw1884.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1884 OF 2011 In WRIT PETITIION NO.6764 OF 2011 Manish Madhukar Shinde & Ors. : Applicants (Petitioners in W.P.) V/s. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority & Ors. : Respondents .... Ms Gauri Godse for the applicants. Mr.Aniruddha Joshi i/b. N. Shrivastava for respondent no.1. Mr.A.I.Patel, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent no.3. Mr.Vijay Thorat, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Vaibhav Sadgure, Mr.S.K.Srivastav, Ms Monorama Mhonty and Gunjan Shah i/b. S.K.Srivastav & Co., for respondent nos.4 & 5. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND SMT.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 07, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the applicants (original petitioners) and the learned counsel for the respective respondents. 2. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the petitioners have filed the civil Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondent nos.1 to 3 to lodge criminal complaint in respect of fraud, mis- sk 2 caw1884.11 representation, mischief and cheating alleged to have been committed by the respondent nos.4 and 5 in connivance with the concerned officers of the respondent no.2. They have also taken undue personal benefit of rental housing scheme of the respondent no.1. It is contended that some of the prayer clauses in the civil Writ Petition whereby the direction is sought are of criminal natural and, therefore, the petitioners have filed Civil Application No.1884 of 2011 seeking permission to delete some of the prayer clauses of the petition which are of civil nature and further requested this Court to convert civil Writ Petition No.6764 of 2011 into a criminal Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and direct the office to place the matter before appropriate Court. 3. The counsel for the applicants has brought to our notice that in prayer clause (a) of the Civil Application, the applicants have sought permission to delete prayer clauses (a)(ii), a(iii) and (b) of the petition. However, due to inadvertence, the other prayer clauses which are of civil nature such as (c) and (d) of the petition have not been mentioned in prayer clause (a) of the Civil Application and, therefore, orally prayed that permission to delete those prayer clauses also may kindly be granted while allowing the Civil Application. sk 3 caw1884.11 4. On the back drop of the above referred facts, it appears that the petitioners originally filed a civil Writ Petition. However, the prayers made in the Writ Petition being of criminal nature, the counsel for the petitioners filed the Civil Application for converting the civil Writ Petition into a criminal Writ Petition and also sought permission to delete some of the prayer clauses of the petition which are of civil nature. The respondents do not have any objection for allowing the Civil Application. 5. In the circumstances, we allow the Civil Application. The petitioners are permitted to delete prayer clauses (a)(ii), a(iii), (b), (c) and (d) of the petition forthwith. Considering the remaining prayer clauses in the petition, we convert the present Writ Petition into a criminal Writ Petition and the petition will be treated as Criminal Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Office is directed to place the matter before appropriate Court for admission. Needless to mention that the maintainability of Criminal Writ Petition at this stage is kept open. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (SMT.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)