50 apl 692 of 2017.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 692 OF 2017 1] Hemant Pratap Vissanji (Deleted vide order dated 06.08.2026) .. Applicant 2] Arati Hemant Vissanji Adult Indian Inhabitant, Aged 60 years, R/at. 38, M.V. Bungalow, Near Bina Apartment, Near Vancha Siddhi Ganesh Mandir, M.V. Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai. Versus 1] State of Maharashtra (Through Andheri Police Station) .. Respondents 2] Pandhari Mariappa Bhosale, Adult Indian Inhabitant, Aged 63 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 3] Anusaya Pandhari Bhosale, Adult Indian Inhabitant, Aged 60 years, Occupation : Agriculture, Both R/at. Chinegaon, Taluka – Aurad (B), District : Bidar, Karnataka – 485 443. ....................  Mr. Subodh Desai, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Rohan Sonawane, Mr. Rishir Daulat, Mr. Mohanish Patkar i/b. M/s. Desai and Desai Associates, Advocate for Applicant.  Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for the Respondent No. 1 – State.  Mr. Suresh Shetye i/b. Ms. Prakruti Joshi, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. ................… 1 of 8 RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Digitally signed by RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Date: 2026.08.13 15:28:13 +0530 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 11, 2026 P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Desai, Senior Advocate for the Applicant, Ms. Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent No.1–State and Mr. Shetye, learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. This Application is filed for seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated vide C.R.No. 598 of 2013, pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai, dated 7th December, 2013. 3. Parties have reconciled the issue and have tendered Minutes of Order. Briefly stated, son of the complainant was working as a Gardener in the bungalow belonging to the Applicant and due to an unfortunate incident, while opening the main gate of the bungalow, the said gate collapsed and caused a fatal injury to the son of the complainant. First Information Report (“FIR”, for short) was registered against the Applicants and the Applicants voluntarily surrendered and were released on bail. 4. Pursuant to the date of the incident much water has flown below the bridge, which is evident from the fact that substantial 2 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt compensation was given by way as stated in the consent affidavit dated 11th August, 2026 of Rs. 4,50,000/- having been accepted by the complainant at that time. 5. Today, when the matter is placed before the Court, the complainant is present along with his wife, who are parents of the deceased victim. I have personally interacted with them in open Court and made them understand the contents of the affidavit, which was filed through their Advocate Ms. Joshi. After I interacted with Mr. Desai, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Applicants, they have shown their humane side by agreeing to hand over a further cheque/Demand Draft dated 6th August, 2026 of Rs. 5,00,000/- in favour of Respondent No. 2, as a further compensatory payment. I need to note over here that when the interaction with Respondent No. 2 -Complainant and his wife took place, he informed the Court that he was studied upto six standard, and what was stated in the affidavit was duly understood by him as to he having accepted and received Rs.4,50,000/- earlier. However, he also persuaded the Court through his Advocate and he also spoke to the Court in Marathi language to consider giving further compensation of upto Rs.2,00,000/- in view of his two daughters, who are of marriageable age. After having interacted with both the parties in the Court, Mr. Desai after taking instructions from the Applicant No.2 present in 3 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt Court apprised the Court that even though initially agreed to pay an additional amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-, as requested by the Complainants/parents of the deceased, the Applicants have decided to give a further amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, as compensatory benefit. When this was disclosed to the Respondent No.2 by me in open Court, he understood the same and agreed to accept the said compensation and put a closure to the criminal proceedings. The interaction which took place with Respondent No.2 in the open Court was in Marathi language, which could be clearly understood by him. He is resident of Bidar in Karnataka State and speaks Marathi language fluently. In that view of the matter, the parties were therefore directed by this Court in the morning Session to draw the Minutes of the Order (MoU) and come to the Court in the afternoon session. The parties have placed before the Court Minutes of Order dated 11th August, 2026, which are taken on record and marked, “X” for identification. The same is signed by both the parties i.e. the Applicant, her Advocate, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and their Advocate. The statements made in the same are taken as an undertaking to this Court. The Applicants have given the Demand Draft (DD) of Rs.5,00,000/- to the Respondent No. 2. Copy of the Minutes of Order and the DD/Banker’s cheque are scanned and reproduced below for reference of parties. 4 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt 5 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt 6 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt 7 of 8 50 apl 692 of 2017.odt 6. Statements made in the Minutes of Order are taken as undertaking given to the Court. The Criminal Application 692 of 2017 is allowed in view of the Minutes of Order in terms of prayer Clause (a), which reads as under: a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the Criminal proceedings under Section 304 (a) of the Indian Penal Code initiated vide CR. No. 598 of 2013, pending on the file of the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai at CC. NO. 460/PS/2014.” 7. The DD/Bankeer’s cheque is handed over to Respondent No.2 through his Advocate Mr. Shetye. 8. Needless to state that the Criminal Proceedings being CC N. PS/08/00460/2014 arising out of C.R. No. 598 of 2013, registered with Metropolitan Magistrate, Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai, for offence punishable under Section 304 A of the Indian Penal Code now stand quashed and set aside. 9. Criminal Application No. 692 of 2017 is allowed and disposed of. Rajeshri Aher [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 8 of 8