M/S. Shreejikrupa Spinners Pvt Ltd And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Dond wp.2622-2013.sxw FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2622 OF 2013 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Girish Kulkarni a/w M. Shukla, Kapil Dave a/w R.M. Jain for petitioners.

Mr. Anand Mishra i/b A.M. Saraogi for respondent No.2. Ms. Anamika Malhotra, APP for State.

CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J.

DATE : 6th April 2016.

P.C.:

1] The present petition is directed against the order of issuance of process dated 8.1.2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai in CC No.1442/SS/12 under Sections 499, 500 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2] The learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 raised the preliminary objection that the present petition is not maintainable and cannot be entertained in view of the substantive alternate remedy available at the commend of the petitioners herein.

3] The Supreme Court in the case of Shalini S. Shetty Vs. Rajendra S. Patil reported in (2010) 8 SCC 329 while formulating the principles while exercising the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the High Court has laid down that, in cases where an alternative statutory mode of redressal has been provided, that would also operate as a restrain on

Dond wp.2622-2013.sxw the exercise of power by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

4] In view of the above, the learned Counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a Revision Application, if so advised before the appropriate Court within three weeks from today. It is needless to mention that if such Revision Application is filed, the concerned Court shall take into consideration the period consumed in prosecuting the present writ petition i.e. from 7.7.2013 till today, as contemplated under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 5] The learned Revisional Court is directed to decide the Revision Application within a period of four weeks from the date of its filing, after taking into consideration the fact that the process is issued on 8.1.2013. 6] Ad-interim relief granted by this Court by its order dated 17.2.2014 shall remain in force for a period of four weeks from today. 7] The Writ Petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)