1 907. WP 1354.18.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1354 OF 2018
Hitesh Jawahar Katira Ors. … Petitioners.
The State of Maharashtra Anr. … Respondents.
Mr. Kartik Garg for the Petitioners.
Ms. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State – Respondents.
Mr. Rushit Thakkar for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : S.S. Shinde and
Smt. Mridula Bhatkar , JJ.
DATE : 31st August, 2018.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent
of the parties.
3. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India is filed with the following prayer :-
“(b) This Hon’ble Court may be invoking writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and by exercising inherent powers under Section
2 907. WP 1354.18.doc
482 of Cr.P.C. may issue appropriate writ, order or
direction and the FIR vide C.R. No. 477 of 2017
registered with Mulund Police Station under Section
498A, 354A, 323, 504 r/w. 34 of IPC may kindly be
quashed and set aside.”
4. Pursuant to the notice issued to the Respondents,
Respondent No.2 has filed the affidavit. Upon perusal of the said
affidavit it clearly reveals that the Petitioners and Respondent No.2
have settled the dispute and to that effect averments are there in the
affidavit of Respondent No.2.
5. Keeping in view the averments in the affidavit in reply of
Respondent No.2 and the exposition of law by the Supreme Court in
the case of Gian Singh v/s. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, that inherent power can be exercised in order to secure
ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of Court in the
facts of the present case it is desirable to accept the settlement.
Accordingly, the following order is passed :-
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer
(ii) Rule is made absolute on above terms.
(iii) The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Smt. Mridula Bhatkar, J.) (S.S. Shinde, J.)
Jyoti by Jyoti