* 1 * W.P. 2773.2009 7 Dec, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2773 OF 2009 Mr. Sudhir Vishwanath Kapdi & Ors. ....Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents * * * * Mr. Shreeram Shirsat, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.A. Shaikh, APP for State­respondent no.1. Mr. Bhujbal h/f. Mr. Prakash Naik, Advocate for respondent no.2. * * * * CORAM :­ SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. 7 DECEMBER, 2011. P.C. :­ 1. This petition is filed for quashing of Criminal Case No. 124 of 2007 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alibaug. The complainant in the proceedings is respondent no.2. Admittedly, before the same Court, there is another criminal case pending being C.C. No. 125 of 2007 which has been filed at the instance of the petitioners herein against respondent no.2. In both the cross­complaints, charges have already been framed by the * 2 * W.P. 2773.2009 7 Dec, 2011 learned Magistrate. 2. The proceedings filed by respondent no.2 are sought to be quashed on the ground that the same have been filed with malafide intentions for wreaking vengeance upon the petitioners over a civil dispute relating to immovable property. Respondent no.2 has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 128 of 2006 in the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Alibaug against the petitioners for declaration of title to an immovable property. The application filed by him therein seeking interim injunction for protection of his alleged possession, has been dismissed and an appeal preferred therefrom is also dismissed. It is contended that in view of dismissal of the applications filed by respondent no.2, he filed a false criminal complaint in order to harass the petitioners. 3. The complaint alleges that on the date and time of the incident, all the petitioners went to the site of the disputed land and assaulted respondent no. 2 and his brother. In the assault, the brother of respondent no.2 sustained grevious injury of fracture of his hand. Respondent no.2 also sustained injuries. Both were treated in the hospital. Perusal of the complaint shows that it contains all the ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioners. As regards the contention of malafides, the proceedings can be quashed on that ground only if the Court can reach the conclusion that the criminal proceedings is manifestly attended with malafides and/or is * 3 * W.P. 2773.2009 7 Dec, 2011 maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him/her due to private or personal grudge. Nothing has been pointed out to this Court to indicate that the complaint filed by respondent no.2 is manifestly attended with malafides. Merely, because there are civil proceedings pending between parties where respondent no.2 has been unsuccessful in getting interim orders, the present complaint of abuse and assault punishable under Sections 324, 328, 408, 406, 427 read with 34 Indian Penal Code does not become malafide. In the circumstances, there is no case made out for quashing of the proceedings. Hence, the petition is dismissed in limine. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]