Bombay High Court
SUNIL RASIKLAL SHAH AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court quashed the criminal proceedings and disposed of the criminal application, writ petition, and intervention application, subject to the parties' compliance with the settlement terms and payment of costs.
Summary
The applicants sought to quash criminal proceedings (FIR No. 100/2019 and C.R. No. 437/2019) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, alleging that they had reached a settlement with the first informant. Intervenors, representing similarly placed investors, intervened to protect their interests, arguing that the settlement should not prejudice their right to prosecute if the applicants defaulted on the settlement terms. The court examined the minutes of order reflecting the settlement and noted that the parties had agreed to abide by its terms, keeping open the right to initiate fresh proceedings if necessary. It held that the criminal application and writ petition should be disposed of, quashing the pending proceedings, while allowing the intervenors to pursue any future action within the limitation period. The court also ordered the applicants to pay costs of Rs. 25,000 to the Kirtikar Law Library.
Issues considered
- Whether the pending criminal proceedings should be quashed in view of a settlement between the parties.
- Whether intervenors have standing to seek protection of their interests in the settlement.
- Whether the court can order costs against the applicants.
- Effect of the settlement on the possibility of future prosecution by intervenors.
Subjects
- criminal application
- writ petition
- quash
- settlement
- intervention
- FIR
- compromise
- costs
Judgment
25-apl-1324-25.doc
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1324 OF 2025
Sunil Rasiklal Shah and anr. .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2020 (Not on Board)
Amit Sunil Shah .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 16964 OF 2026 (Not on Board)
....................
Mr. S.M. Gorwadkar, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Sujay H. Gangal,
Mr.Varun Thanawala and Mr. Harshal Mule, Advocates for
Applicants.
Mr. Shriram Kulkarni a/w Ms. Pranjal M. Khatavkar, for
Intervenors.
Mr. Ameya Mahadik, for Respondent No.2.
Ms. S.G. Talhar, APP for Respondent-State.
API- Mr.Khalil Shaikh, EOW, present.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Gorwadkar, learned Senior Advocate for
Applicants, Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate for the Intervenors,
Mr.Mahadik, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2 and Ms.
1 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
Talhar, learned APP for Respondent-State.
2. At the outset, Mr. Kulkarni would submit that the
Intervention Application is ready and it can be lodged today. Copy of
the same has already been exchanged with the parties. The same is
permitted to be filed and numbered and the copy of the same is given
to me and the same is dealt with along with Criminal Application and
the Petition and is disposed of accordingly.
3. Both, the Criminal Application and the Criminal Writ Petition
were listed before me on 19th August 2026 and they were argued
threadbare. Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate appearing for the
intervenors persuaded the Court to reject the Application/Petition on
the ground that the principal complaint filed by first informant infact
named the intervenors being at the severe loss and at the receiving end
qua the Applicants and the Petitioners. After hearing the parties, this
Court directed them to consolidate and arrive at a middle position so
as to dispose of the present proceedings since insofar as the
Applicants/Petitioners and first informant before the Court were
concerned, they both had reconciled their dispute and were desirous of
putting an end to the criminal proceedings. However, many similarly
placed persons like the first informant some of who are duly
represented by Mr. Kulkarni had initially approached the Division
2 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
Bench pursuant to which they were directed to approach the EOW.
Mr. Kulkarni would submit that the Petitions before the Court filed by
such similarly placed investors are pending. In the course of
investigation, they were informed by the Juhu Police Station to
approach the EOW and register their claim. He would submit that
since the first informant had also named some of the similarly placed
persons, he has intervened herein.
4. Mr. Gorwadkar, learned Senior Advocate representing the
Applicant/Petitioner and Mr. Mahadik learned Advocate appearing for
the first respondent jointly and in tandem submit that while arriving at
a settlement, the interests of Mr.Kulkarni’s client have also been
adequately answered and taken care of by the Petitioners/Applicants.
My attention is drawn to paragraph 6. Therefore, I heard Mr. Kulkarni
who would submit that in view of the compromise and settlement
between the first informant and the Petitioners/Applicants if the
present FIR No. 100/2019 and C.R. No. 437/2019 gets withdrawn, it
should not happened that his client will have no cause of action.
Hence, he would submit that leave and liberty be given to his client to
take appropriate steps as available to them in law for filing any such
proceedings as may be available to them in the event if the Petitioners/
Applicants do not keep their promise and if they do not keep their
3 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
word as stated in the consent terms. To that extent, I agree with what
Mr. Kulkarni submits. Putting an end to the lis and criminal action qua
the Applicants/Petitioners and the first informant in the present
proceedings should not and rather may not come in the way of Mr.
Kulkarni’s clients, if those interests are not taken care of and/or settled
as stated by the Applicants/Petitioners in paragraph 6 of the consent
terms. The issue of redevelopment is the precursor to the present lis
and the criminal law is set in motion and therefore if the parties come
before the Court and attempt to reconcile in such cases, the Court
should infact come to the aid of the parties. Therefore I am of the
opinion that the present Criminal Application and Writ Petition which
have been pending for past more than 6 years deserve to be given a
quietus and brought to a closure.
5. The parties to the proceedings have filed Minutes of Order.
They are taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. They are
signed by the parties and their respective Advocates. They are dated
21st August 2026. For the sake of convenience and ease of reference,
the same are scanned and reproduced below in the present order itself
so that the parties do not attempt to obtain certified copy and rely
upon rights and obligations stated therein.
4 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
5 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
6 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
7 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
6. The rights and obligations stated in the Minutes of Order
including what is stated in paragraph 6 are taken as an undertaking
8 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
given to this Court and parties shall ensure they shall abide by the
same. Any delineation therein would be treated as a willful
disobedience and violation of the order passed by this Court which
shall be noted by the parties. All contentions of Mr. Kulkarni’s client
are otherwise kept expressly open in accordance with law including the
issue of limitation, if any, that may come in the way of his client in
launching any such prosecution, if so required in accordance with law.
Equally, all contentions of the Applicants/Petitioners are also kept
expressly open to contest any such proceedings or further proceedings
that may be filed against the Applicants/Petitioners in accordance with
law.
7. Needless to state that the date of the filing of the present FIR
will be taken into account if at all any further future FIR by Mr.
Kulkarni’s clients.
8. Criminal Application No. 1324 of 2025 and Criminal Writ
Petition No. 1201 of 2020 are both disposed of in terms of aforesaid
Minutes of Order. However, since the criminal law has been set in
motion, I direct the Applicants to pay costs of Rs.25,000/- to the
Kirtikar Law Library, High Court Appellate Side, Mumbai within a
period of four (4) weeks from today.
9 of 10
25-apl-1324-25.doc
9. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Applicatioin stands
allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus:
“a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the Criminal
proceedings being C.C. No. 739/PW/2021 pending before Ld.
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, 47 th Court, Espalande, Mumbai,
alongwith the chargesheet filed therein w.r.t. C.R.No. 437 of
2019 qua the Petitioners; ”
10. The present Criminal Application, the Writ Petition and
Intervention Application are all disposed of accordingly.
Urmila Ingale [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by AJAY
AJAY TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.08.24
20:54:33 +0530
10 of 10
Checking your session…