BHUPAL ANNA BHARISHETH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 27 of the Constitution of India by the accused No. 1 for quashing of proceeding, arising out of a complaint filed against him by one Kantilal Parekh, 1st respondent herein, being Case No. 91/W of 1979 before the learned Magistrate, 29th Court, Dadar and for setting aside the order for issue of process made therein by the learned Magistrate and also for setting aside the orders of the Sessions Judge and Magistrate holding that the offences mentioned in the said complaint were not bared by law of limitation.

(2.) At the outset, it may be pointed out that although the Magistrate has issued process only against petitioner No. 1 i.e. accused No. 1 viz. Bhupal Anna Bhairsheth his two sons Ajit and Suresh who were accused Nos. 2 and 3 have also joined in this petition as petitioners. Obviously, they cannot have any grievance against the said order of process and can have no locus standi in the matter. So far as they are concerned, therefore, the rule granted in their favour would stand discharged.

(3.) The petitioners have apart from respondent No. 1 made other persons parties viz. M/s. Naigaum, Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., the Municipal Corporation for Greater Bombay, M/s. Naigaum Bhupal Co-operative Society Ltd. Party respondents to the petitioners. It is very difficult to see how in this petition for quashing of proceedings they could ever be made parties. The petition against them is clearly misconceived and must be rejected in lamine.