FR. ARLINO DMELLO AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF GOA THR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND 2 ORS

                                WP 364 OF 2026




vinita
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 364 OF 2026
  FR. ARLINO D’MELLO & ANR.                               … Petitioners.
       VERSUS
  STATE OF GOA & ORS.                                    … Respondents.


 Mr Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate with Mr Vledson Braganza, Mr Sagar
 Rivankar, Mr Nilesh Kumbhar, Advocate for the Applicant.
 Ms Swati Kamat Wagh, Additional Public Prosecutor with Ms Shibani Singh,
 Advocate holding for Mr N. Vaze, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
 Mr S. S. Kantak, Senior Advocate with Ms Laxmi Dessai and Ms Saicha Dessai,
 Advocates for the Respondent No.3.
 Mr Nitin N. Sardessai, Senior Advocate with Mr Kabir Sabnis and Mr Tarun
 Rebello, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 2.1 to 2.3.

                     CORAM:- AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR,J.
                     Reserved on :- 7th September 2026
                     Pronounced on:- 9th September 2026.

ORDER

  1.     The Petitioners are senior citizens and senior priests of the Archdiocese
         of Goa and Daman. By the present petition, the Petitioners seek the
         quashing of FIR No. 23/2010 by consent of the Respondent Nos. 2(a),
         2(b), 2(c) and 3. Respondent Nos. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) are the legal heirs of the
         deceased first informant (original Respondent No. 2). The 3rd
         Respondent is the developer of the land in dispute. The FIR was
         registered against the Petitioners on 18.01.2010 at Panaji Police Station
         for offences under Sections 468, 471, and 420 read with Section 34 of the
         Indian Penal Code.

                                   Page 1 of 4
                              9th Setpember 2026
                            WP 364 OF 2026



2.   The dispute between the parties arises from a long-standing controversy
     concerning property bearing Chalta No. 44A of P.T. Sheet No. 162 at
     Caranzalem, Panaji, and alleged tenancy rights. The dispute has been the
     subject matter of several revenue, civil and writ proceedings. The original
     complainant and his family had pursued remedies before the Inspector
     of Surveys and Land Records, this Hon’ble Court and the Civil Court,
     by way of Writ Petition No. 341/2010 and Regular Civil Suit No.
     53/2011/D, wherein the reliefs sought by them came to be
     rejected/dismissed.

3.   After registering the FIR on 18.01.2010, investigation was conducted
     and an “A” Summary Report was filed by the prosecution. However,
     upon protest, further investigation was directed. Despite the passage of
     more than fifteen years, no charge-sheet has been filed against the
     Petitioners.

4.   In the meantime, the underlying civil/property dispute has been
     amicably and finally settled. The legal heirs of the original complainant
     have entered into a Settlement Agreement and Affidavit-cum-
     Undertaking dated 17.06.2026 with Respondent No. 3, recording that
     all claims and disputes, including the alleged tenancy rights dispute,
     stand fully, finally and irrevocably settled. They have further confirmed
     that no claims or disputes survive and that they do not wish to
     pursue or continue the criminal proceedings arising from the FIR No.
     23/2010.

5.   I have perused the Settlement Agreement and Affidavit-cum-
     Undertaking dated 17.06.2026. Mr. Kantak, the Learned Senior Counsel
     appearing for Respondent No.3, and Mr. Sardessai, the Learned Senior
     Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2, confirm the settlement

                                Page 2 of 4
                           9th Setpember 2026
                             WP 364 OF 2026



     between the parties.

6.   Therefore, in view of the settlement, I am satisfied that the substratum
     of the prosecution no longer survives, and the continuation of the FIR
     would amount to an unnecessary continuation of the criminal process in
     respect of a civil dispute which has been conclusively resolved between
     the concerned parties. In any case, since the registration of the FIR, no
     chargesheet has been filed against the Petitioner to date. The
     extraordinary delay, coupled with the absence of any final prosecutorial
     outcome, renders continuation of the criminal proceedings unjust and
     serves no useful purpose. Therefore, this is a fit case to put an end to
     the criminal proceedings by applying the principles of law laid down by
     the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, [(2012)
     10 SCC 303] and recently in Anand Kumar alias Sanjay Lalwani v.
     The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., [2026 SCC Online SC 1724].
     Therefore, in the interest of justice, I am exercising powers under Article
     226 and 227 and under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR No.
     23/2010.

7.   In view thereof, the Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer Clause
     (a) of the Petition which reads as follows:

         “a. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for records and proceedings
         of FIR bearing No. 23 of 2010 dated 18.01.2010 registered u/s
         468, 471, 420 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Panaji
         Police Station, North Goa and to issue appropriate writ, order
         and/or direction to quash and set aside the impugned FIR bearing
         No. 23 of 2010 dated 18.01.2010 registered u/s 468, 471, 420
         and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Panaji Police Station,
         North Goa;”

                                 Page 3 of 4
                            9th Setpember 2026
                                                       WP 364 OF 2026



                       8.        However, because criminal proceedings were initiated, I am of the view
                                 that the parties should pay the costs. Accordingly, the Petitioners and
                                 the Respondent Nos. 2 (a), 2 (b), 2 (c), and 3 shall jointly pay
                                 Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakhs only) as and by way of costs to the
                                 Goa State Legal Services Authority within a period of two days from
                                 today.

                       9.        The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Goa State
                                 Legal Services Authority.

                       10.       The relief granted in terms of prayer clause (a) shall become operative
                                 only after the payment of costs as above.

                       11.       The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

                       12.       This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/Personal
                                 Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on the production by fax
                                 or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.




                                                                        AMIT S. JAMASANDEKAR, J.




                                                           Page 4 of 4
Signed by: VINITA VIKAS NAIK
                                                      9th Setpember 2026
Designation: Private Secretary
Date: 10/09/2026 11:10:06