Basilio Santana Castelino., v. Balaji Property And Developers, Rep. By Rajiv Somani And 5 ORS.,

1 wpcr161-18dt.03-04-19 Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.161/2018 Basilio Santana Castelino.

..... Petitioner.

Versus

Balaji Property & Developers and others. ...... Respondents. Petitioner Basilio Castelino in person.

Mr. Shashikant N. Joshi with Ms. Sameera Bhat, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

Mr. Vilas Pavithran, Advocate for Respondents No.2 & 3. Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondents No.4, 5 and 6.

Coram : R.D. Dhanuka & Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.

Date : 3 April 2019.

P.C.:

1.

Pursuant to Order dated 8 January 2019, granting liberty to the Petitioner to amend the prayer clause, the Petitioner has carried out amendment and has added three prayers at page 28A of the Petition.

2.

The Petitioner has filed an application dated 14 March 2019 stating that in so far as first prayer is concerned, the Petitioner has already filed an application for disposal of the case, dated 6/3/2019 in the trial Court. In so far as second prayer is concerned,

2 wpcr161-18dt.03-04-19 in paragraph 7, the Petitioner has stated that he has to take steps by filing a statement under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. In so far as third prayer is concerned, it is stated in paragraph 8 that the Petitioner has to take steps to issue notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to all the Respondents. In paragraph 9, it is stated that in view of the steps to be taken by the Petitioner, further proceedings in this Petition have become infructuous. 3.

The Petition has therefore become infructuous as stated in the Application dated 14 March 2019. The Petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. If any such proceedings are filed, the same would be decided by the appropriate Court, in accordance with law and, on its own merits. 4.

There are serious allegations made by the Petitioner in this Criminal Writ Petition against various parties and also against Judicial Officers. The allegations made by the Petitioner are strongly opposed and denied by the Respondents. It is made clear that none of the Respondents have accepted any of the allegations made by the Petitioner in this Criminal Writ Petition.

5.

Since the Petitioner proposes to file appropriate proceedings as stated in the application dated 14.3.2019, we are not inclined to go into the allegations made by the Petitioner in this

3 wpcr161-18dt.03-04-19 Criminal Writ Petition.

6.

The Petition is dismissed as infructuous, with the aforesaid clarification. No order as to costs.

Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.

R.D. Dhanuka, J.