Allowed

Mantra Magic Films Pvt. Limited through Roabin Mazumdar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC4 Jul 2023APL/260/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a criminal petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC. The dispute arose from a misunderstanding, was resolved amicably, and continued prosecution would be futile. The court quashed the FIR subject to a deposit of legal costs.

What did the court decide?

quash and set aside FIR No. 73/2014 and proceedings arising therefrom; deposit of Rs.20,000 by Applicants 1 & 2 and Rs.15,000 by Applicants 3 & 4 with HCLSA.

Mantra Magic Films Pvt. Limited through… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

19 apl 260.22final.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 260 of 2022

¶3

Mantra Magic Films Pvt. Limited
3, Sanghrajka House,
558, Adenwalla Road,
Matunga, Mumbai 400 019.

¶4

Through its Director
Mr Roabin Mazumdar

¶5

2. Inheritance India Land Conservation Co. P. Ltd.
3, Sanghrajka House,
558, Adenwalla Road,
Matunga, Mumbai 400 019.

¶6

Through its Director
Mr Roabin Mazumdar

¶7

3. Mr Roabin Mazumdar

¶8

4. Mrs. Lygia Roabin Mazumdar
Both 3 & 4 having their residence at
3, Sanghrajka House,
558, Adenwalla Road,
Matunga, Mumbai 400 019.… Applicants

¶9

Versus

¶10

LATA SUNIL PANJWANI

¶11

Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date: 2023.07.11 15:07:04 +0530

¶12

1.The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of the Economic

¶13

Page No. 1 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

¶14

19 apl 260.22final.doc

¶15

 Offences Wing, Unit I, @ C.R. No.73/2014,
 Initially registered with Matunga Police Station
 @ C R No. 261/2014)

¶16

2. Mr Paul Abraham
 Building No.101, Flat No.8,
 Silver Oak Apartment,
 DLF Phase 1, Gurugram,
 Haryana 122002
 And
 Currently Residing at:
 73, Barnshaw House, Coxhill Way,
 Aylesbury, HP21 8FH,
 Buckinghamshire

¶17

3. Smt. Ayesha Nasim
 Age 70 years, Occupation NA
 260 A, Devashri Gardens,
 Socorro, Porvorim,
 Goa 403521

¶18

4. Smt. Leila Baig
 Age 75 years, Occupation – NA,
 having adress at
 R-8C, Hauz Khas,
 New Delhi – 110016

¶19

5. Smt. Alieda Baig,
 age 43 years, Occupation NA
 R-8C, Hauz Khas
 New Delhi 110016.

¶20

6. Shri sAtish Gadekar (since deceased)

¶21

Page No. 2 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

¶22

19 apl 260.22final.doc

¶23

7. Smt. Anisha Gadekar

¶24

 Age 75 years
 304, Sector 21A, Faridabad,
 Haryana 121001.

¶25

8. Smt Preeti Virmani

¶26

 age 70 years
 101/16, Silver Oaks Apt, DLF Phase 1,
 Gurugram, Haryana 122002.

¶27

9. Smt Rizwana Sartaj
 age 75
 73, Barnshaw House,
 Coxhill Way, Aylesbury, HP218FH,
 Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom.
Respondents

¶28

Mr Mithilesh Mishra i/b Vikram Sutaria for Applicant.
Mr Rahul Sanklecha for Respondent No.2.

¶29

Mr J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.

¶30

CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE &
 R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

¶31

 DATE : 4th JULY 2023

¶32

Order (Per R. N. Laddha, J.) :-

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶34

2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the

¶35

Page No. 3 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

¶36

19 apl 260.22final.doc consent of and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶37

3.By this Criminal Application, under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants seek the
quashing of FIR bearing C.R. No.261 of 2014 dated 08
August 2014, registered against them at Matunga Police
Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420
and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 409
of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3,4 and 5 of the
M.P.I.D. and the same came to be transferred to EOW Unit-1,
Mumbai and renumbered as FIR No. 73/2014. Quashing is
sought on the premise that the parties have amicably settled
their dispute.

¶38

4.When this Criminal Application for quashing the
impugned FIR was placed before us, it was stated by the
learned counsel for Applicants and Respondent No.2 to 9 that
the dispute was arising from misunderstanding and
misconception, and had been resolved amicably. They submit
that dispute had a civil flavour and that continuing the
prosecution would serve no purpose, given the settlement
between the parties. They argued that this case is covered by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decisions in Gian Singh v/s.

¶39

Page No. 4 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

¶40

19 apl 260.22final.doc State of Punjab & Anr. 1 and Narinder Singh & Ors. v/s. State of Punjab and Anr. 2

¶41

5.Learned APP representing Respondent No.1 submits
that suitable orders may be passed.

¶42

6.The learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 9
tendered consent affidavits on record. They appeared in the
Court and stated that they have no objection to the quashing
of the impugned FIR against the Applicants due to a
settlement between them. Upon questioning, they confirmed
the contents of their affidavit. They are identified by the
counsel and the learned APP has verified their original
Aadhar Cards, of which the duly signed copies are placed on
record.

¶43

7.After examining the present case in accordance with the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of
Gian Singh and Narinder Singh (supra) and the material on
record, it is clear that the dispute between the parties had
been resolved amicably. As the complainants are no longer
willing to support the allegations, which they now describe as
arising from misunderstanding and misconception, continuing

¶44

1 (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶45

2 (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶46

Page No. 5 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

¶47

19 apl 260.22final.doc the prosecution would be an empty formality. In order to secure ends of justice, it would be appropriate in the given case that the impugned FIR is put to an end. The consent affidavits filed on behalf of Respondents/Complainants support the prayer to quash the impugned FIR. Therefore, based on these facts, FIR bearing C.R. No. 73/2014 registered with EOW, Unit-I, Mumbai (initially registered with Matunga Police Station, Mumbai being C.R. No.261/2014) against the Applicants needs to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, we allow this Criminal Application in terms of prayer clause (a) and quash and set aside the subject FIR No. 73/2014 and the proceedings arising therefrom qua the applicants, subject to the condition that Applicant Nos. 1 & 2 to deposit cost of Rs.20,000/- each and Applicant Nos.3 & 4 to deposit Rs.15,000/- each with the High Court Legal Services Authority within three weeks of the uploading of this order.

¶48

8.Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Application is
disposed of accordingly.

¶49

R. N. LADDHA, J. NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶50

Lata.S.Panjwani, P.S.

¶51

Page No. 6 of 6 ______________________________________________ 4 July 2023

Mantra Magic Films Pvt. Limited through Roabin Mazumdar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantra Magic Films Pvt. Limited through Roabin Mazumdar and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Danamal Chandwani and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

V.M. Mohamad Daud Khan and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ajay Nagindas Gandhi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rajhoo Ambalal Bbarot and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Subhashchandra Vinubhai Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rakesh Indrakumar Vashisht Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.