Bipin Kantilal Joshi v. Shailesh Chandarana And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 106 OF 2019 Bipin Kantilal Joshi .....Applicant versus Shailesh Chandarana and anr.
.....Respondents Mr. Advait Tamhankar, advocate for the applicant. Ms. Lochan Chandkar, advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. S. R. Shinde, APP for the State.
CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ.
DATE : 8th JULY, 2019.
P. C. :
Heard learned counsel and learned APP appearing for the respective parties.
2.
The criminal application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing the proceedings of C.C.No.965/PW/2014 pending on the file of learned Metropolitan Magistrate's Court at Vikhroli, Mumbai. The said case arises out of registration of FIR bearing CR No.76 of 2014 with Pant Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, at the instance of respondent No.1, for the offences punishable under Sections 63(B) and 64 of the Copyrights Act, 1957. 3.
Pending trial, the parties to the application settled their Shubhada S Kadam 1/3
dispute amicably and, in pursuance of an understanding arrived at between them, they have now approach this Court for quashing the proceedings of the subject criminal case by consent. Respondent No.1 has filed an affidavit dated 25th March, 2019. In paragraph 4, he has given his no objection for quashing the proceedings of the subject criminal case. Respondent No.1 is personally present before the Court. On being questioned, he specifically stated that he has gone through the application and the affidavit as well and has fully understood the contents thereof. He further confirmed that he is given no objection for quashing the proceedings of the subject criminal case on his own free will and without there being any pressure or coercion. 4.
It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of complaint, it transpires that the allegations are totally personal in nature. In these circumstances, and especially, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab [2014 AIR SCW 2065], we find that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. However, at the same time, costs need to be saddled on the parties for using the police and judicial mechanism for settling their personal disputes.
Shubhada S Kadam 2/3
5.
Accordingly, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to payment of costs of Rs.10000/- by the applicant to the "Yashodhan Charitable Trust" (having Registration No.1895/Satara, Maharashtra, Account No.60245873355 IFSC Code MAHB000305) an institution that takes care of mentally retarded and elderly people in the downtrodden society. The applicant shall pay the said costs and produce the receipt thereof on the file of this Court within a period of four weeks from today, failing which, the criminal application shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Court and the order quashing the criminal proceedings shall be treated as nonest. 6.
Subject to above, the criminal application stands disposed off. [SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] Shubhada S Kadam 3/3