Hcl Infosystems Ltd v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION [1] CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5378 OF 2019 M/s. HCL Infotech Ltd.
....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
.... Respondents ......
WITH [2] CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1655 OF 2023 HCL Infosystems Ltd.
....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
.... Respondents .....
[3] CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION [STAMP] NO.22000 OF 2023 Manas Kumar Das ....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
.... Respondents .....
WITH [4] CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION [STAMP] NO.21250 OF 2023 Rajeev Singh Bisht ....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
.... Respondents .......
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION [STAMP] NO.13180 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5378 OF 2019 ......
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION [STAMP] NO.13128 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1655 OF 2023 Deshmane(PS)
: 2 :
.......
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION [STAMP] NO.13298 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION [STAMP] NO.22000 OF 2023 ......
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION [STAMP] NO.13184 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION [STAMP] NO.21250 OF 2023 ______ Mr. Vagish Kumar Singh, Advocate a/w. Avni Siinghania, Riya Pichaya i/b. Singhania & Co. for the Petitioner in all WPs. Mr. Shrikant H. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Yuvraj P. Narvankar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in all WPs.
______ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 12th JULY, 2024 P.C. :
1.
In these Petitions today a common order is passed. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with consent of the parties.
2.
Heard Mr. Vagish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Petitioner in all the Petitions, Mr. Shrikant Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent-State and Mr. Yuvraj Narvankar, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 in all the Petitions.
: 3 :
3.
The Petitioners are the original accused Nos.1, 2, 6 and 12 in Regular Criminal Case no.517/2014 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kolhapur. The learned Magistrate vide his order dated 4.2.2017 was pleased to issue notice against the present Petitioners and other accused for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 418, 420 read with 34 of IPC. Said order was challenged in the present Petitions. 4.
During pendency of these Petitions, now a settlement is arrived at between the parties i.e. the Petitioner HCL Infotech Ltd. and the complainant. A copy of the same is annexed to I.A.(stamp) No.13180/2024. In Paragraph-7 of the said consent terms, it is mentioned that the parties will file appropriate proceedings, joint applications and / or Petitions before various courts by producing a copy of the settlement agreement for withdrawing / quashing of the pending criminal cases.
5.
The complainant is present in the Court in person. He is identified by his learned counsel. The complainant accepts that the matter is settled between the parties and he
: 4 :
does not wish to proceed with the complaint. In view of this settlement and statement made by the complainant before the Court today, all these Petitions can be allowed qua the Petitioners.
6.
Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The process issued against the Petitioners in R.C.C. No.517/2014 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kolhapur vide his order dated 4.2.2017 is quashed and set aside qua the present Petitioners.
(ii) Interim stay granted stands vacated.
(iii) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. (iv) The Petitions are disposed of accordingly. With disposal of Writ Petitions, nothing survives in the Interim Applications, the same are also disposed of as such.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date:
2024.07.16 10:56:58 +0530 PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE