PRAMOD PARMESHWARLAL BANKA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these three revision applications challenge the order dated 24th August 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Criminal Revision Application No. 529/2007 thereby allowing the revision filed respondent No. 2 herein and setting aside the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai whereby learned Magistrate had discharged the accused No. 1 Pramod Banka and accused No. 4 Rani Agarwal. By the impugned order the learned Revisional Court has also directed to frame charge under section 409 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) against accused No. 2 Vijay kumar Agarwal.

(2.) THE Apex Court by its order dated 11th May 2011 has directed the present revisions to be disposed off within a stipulated period. As such I had heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length on 4th and 5th July 2011. However, noticing that on an earlier occasion the parties had agreed to settle the matter, as could be reflected from the order passed by Hon'ble Justice Bhatia on 24th March 2011, I thought it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the parties to explore the possibility of settlement. Accordingly, matter was adjourned to 11th July 2010. On 11th July 2011, at the request of the parties, the matter was again adjourned to 19th July 2011. However, since on 19th July 2011, the learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 expressed his client's unwillingness to settle the matter, I had pronounced the order in the Court thereby making rule absolute in terms of prayer Clause (a).

(3.) THE respondent No. 2 complainant has filed a criminal complaint before the learned Magistrate. In nutshell, the case of the complainant is as under: