CR.MA/1105520/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 11055 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Sd/- ============================================= = 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? 1 to 5 NO ============================================= = LALITBHAI JESINGBHAI DHAMI & 5 - Applicant(s) Versus KANTILAL CHAMPAKLAL SHETH & 1 - Respondent(s) ============================================= = Appearance : MR BC DAVE for Applicant(s) : 1 - 6. MR.MRUDUL M BAROT for Respondent(s) : 1, MRM RC KODEKAR ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 2, ============================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date : 08/10/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Learned counsel Mr.Barot waives service for respondent No.1 and learned A.P.P. waives service for respondent No.2. CR.MA/1105520/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. Invoking section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of Criminal Case No.2991 of 2008 pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navsari and a grievance is also made that a second complaint made on the same facts by respondent No.1 is also entertained by the criminal court and order dated 22.4.2008 is made thereon for registering a complaint for the offence punishable under section 24 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. 3. During the course of arguments, it was, on instruction, submitted by learned counsel Mr.Mrudul Barot, appearing for the original complainant, that he would have no objection to the petition being allowed even without entering into the merits and would not press the complaints for prosecution of any of the petitioners if an assurance is given and recorded herein that the petitioners would co-operate in restoration of supply of water and electricity to the complainant and allow him to use the common latrine as he was earlier permitted to do as a tenant. Responding to that, learned counsel Mr.B.C.Dave, appearing for the petitioners, stated, on instructions, that the petitioners would extend all necessary co-operation in restoration of the above services and sign necessary applications for restoration of electricity and water supply, at the cost of the complainant, and allow use of the latrine as was done earlier. It was also stated at the bar that, since the original disputes were amicably settled to the aforesaid extent, the parties will not hinder the activities of each other and the original complainant will be allowed to carry on his business peacefully and without any interference CR.MA/1105520/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT by or at the instance of the petitioners. 4. The above limited consensus is recorded with the clarification that the parties have agreed to end the two criminal proceedings pending as aforesaid without prejudice to their rights and contentions as regards their status and nature of relationship as tenant and landlord or otherwise. And Mr.B.C.Dave has assured that the petitioners will respond and co-operate immediately in restoration of the above services and facilities. 5. Accordingly, by consent, the petition is allowed and both the criminal cases, being Criminal Cases No.2991 of 2008 and 2834 of 2008 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navsari, are hereby quashed. The parties shall abide by the statement recorded hereinabove. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. Sd/- ( D.H.Waghela, J.) (KMG Thilake)