Allowed

Krish Sanjeev Kothari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC12 Jul 2024WP/2559/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in a criminal breach of trust case sought quashing after amicable settlement with the informant company. The informant consented by affidavit; the Court accepted undertakings to rectify and deliver defective goods, quashed the crime subject to payment of Rs. 2 lakh cost to the Central Police Welfare Fund.

What did the court decide?

C.R. No. 95 of 2024 (renumbered C.R. No. 21 of 2024) quashed with informant's consent, subject to payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- cost to Central Police Welfare Fund.

Krish Sanjeev Kothari and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gitalaxmi 21-wp-2559-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2559 OF 2024

¶5

Krish Sanjeev Kothari & Anr. …..Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Prerak Choudhary a/w Ms. Anisha Balse for the Petitioners. Mr. V. N. Sagare, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.

¶9

Dr. Sujay Kantawala a/w Mr. Anukul Seth & Mr. Aayushya Geruja for Respondent No. 2.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 23^rd JULY 2024

¶11

P.C.:-

¶12

Petitioners, accused in C. R. No. 95 of 2024 dated 29^th February

¶13

2024, originally registered with Dadar Police Station, Mumbai, for the offence punishable under Section 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and now being investigated by the Economic Offences Wing (E.O.W.), Unit-VI, Mumbai having renumbered C. R. No. 21 of 2024, have invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing of the said crime with the consent of Respondent No. 2, the Informant, being represented by Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, its Authorized Signatory.

¶14

1/4

¶15

Gitalaxmi 21-wp-2559-2024.doc

¶16

Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submitted that, in the interregnum the Petitioners and Respondent No. 2 have amicably settled their disputes and differences and the Petitioners have agreed to supply goods to Respondent No. 2 within stipulated period. He submitted that, therefore the Respondent No. 2 has given its consent for quashing the crime in question. He therefore prayed that, the said crime may be quashed with the consent of Respondent No. 2.

¶17

Mr. Kantawala, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 2 tendered across the bar an Affidavit dated 17^th July 2024, sworn by Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, Authorized Representative of the Respondent No. 2, duly affirmed before a Notary Public. It is stated therein that, the parties herein have settled their disputes and differences amicably and the Petitioners have undertaken that, through the Vendors, they will offer assistance and shall get replaced/rectified the goods (as per the BOQ annexed to the Consent Terms) which are defective and complete the safe delivery of the goods (currently under production with Vendors) to the Respondent No. 2, within a period of three months. The undertakings mentioned by the Petitioners in the said Affidavit are accepted as undertakings given to this Court.

¶18

3.1) In paragraph no. 7 thereof, Mr. Ashutosh Sharma has given his consent on behalf of the Company-Respondent No. 2 to quash the crime in question.

¶19

2/4

¶20

Gitalaxmi 21-wp-2559-2024.doc

¶21

3.2) Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, the Authorized Representative of the Respondent No. 2 is personally present in the Court and through his counsel reiterates the contents of his Affidavit dated 17^th July 2024 and his ‘no objection’ for quashing of the crime in question.

¶22

In view thereof, we are inclined to quash the C. R. No. 95 of 2024 dated 29^th February 2024, originally registered with Dadar Police Station, Mumbai and now being investigated by the E.O.W., Unit-VI, Mumbai having renumbered C. R. No. 21 of 2024.

¶23

As we expressed our opinion for quashing of said C. R. No. 95 of 2024 dated 29^th February 2024, originally registered with Dadar Police Station, Mumbai and now being investigated by the E.O.W., Unit-VI, Mumbai having renumbered C. R. No. 21 of 2024, Mr. Prerak Choudhary, learned Advocate for the Petitioners on instructions submitted that, the Petitioners will pay a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each totalling to Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) to the Central Police Welfare Fund of the Maharashtra Police, within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of present Order on the official website of Bombay High Court. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court.

¶24

We therefore direct the Petitioners to pay a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each totalling to Rs. 2,00,000/(Rupees Two Lakhs Only) jointly or severally, to the Central Police Welfare

¶25

3/4

¶26

Gitalaxmi 21-wp-2559-2024.doc

¶27

Fund of the Maharashtra Police, within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of present Order on the official website of Bombay High Court.

¶28

6.1) The details of the Bank Account for payment of cost are as under :-

¶29

Bank Name :- Axis Bank Limited Branch Name :- Worli, Mumbai (M.H.), Mumbai-400 025 Account Name :- Central Police Welfare Fund Account Number :- 914010029005759 IFSC Code :- UTIB0000060

¶30

6.2) Petitioners to deposit the said cost of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only), jointly or severally, within stipulated period as noted above and submit receipt of the same in the Registry of this Court.

¶31

In view of the above and subject to payment of cost, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶32

It is made clear that, if the cost is not paid within stipulated period as mentioned above, the Petition shall stand revived automatically and in that event, the Investigating Officer will complete the investigation of the present crime expeditiously.

¶33

List the Petition on board on 13^th August 2024 under caption ‘For Reporting Compliance’ of present Order.

¶34

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)

¶35

(A. S. GADKARI, J.)

¶36

GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR

¶37

4/4

¶38

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.07.29 10:51:29 +0530

Krish Sanjeev Kothari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krish Sanjeev Kothari 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aftab Anwar Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra

Neelam Nimit Gajjar vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Yogesh Bhadra @ Bhanushali vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ajay Dinkar Tambe and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Tabassum Begum Wife of Mohammed Wasi Sayed (Zaidi) vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Tabassum Begam Wife of Mohammed Wasi Sayed (Zaidi) vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.