44.APL.252.2022.doc HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.252 OF 2022 Baliram Dharma Salpi and Anr. .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents ....................  Mr. Mihir M. Linge, Advocate for Applicants.  Ms. Anuja Gotad, APP for Respondent No.1.  Mr. Kashyap Bhalerao, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Linge, learned Advocate for Applicants; Ms. Gotad, learned APP for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Bhalerao, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2. 2. This is an Application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) in connection with C.R. No.168 of 2012 registered with Mahatma Phule Chowk Police Station, Kalyan, District – Thane. 3. Applicants are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 and 2 have approached this Court seeking quashing of complaint which came to be registered at the instance of private Respondent No.2 who is the Complainant on 07.04.2012 vide C.R.No.168 of 2012 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120B and 34 of the Indian 1 of 3 44.APL.252.2022.doc Penal Code, 1860. 4. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that Applicants committed forgery of certain documents, whereby they grabbed the land belonging to the Respondent No.2. However, on the complaint being lodged and criminal action being invoked and investigation being done the matter is pending before the Trial Court. However, in the interregnum, the Applicants and Respondent No.2 have reconciled their dispute by virtue of the Applicants having handed over the possession of the subject land back to the Respondent No.2. Both Applicants are present before me and Respondent No.2 is also present in Court. I have interacted with them and Respondent No.2 would submit that he has received possession of his lands, which is the subject matter of the complaint lodged by him. That statement stands recorded. Respondent No.2’s Consent Affidavit dated 24.07.2023 is taken on record and appended at page No.107. Learned Advocate has drawn my attention at page No.98 which is the Reconveyance Deed dated 21.08.2012 and would submit that by virtue of the Deed of Reconveyance, the land has been returned back to the private Respondent No.2. 5. Respondent No.2 acknowledges the Deed and submits that he has received possession of the same land. The Consent Affidavit is filed which submits that the Respondent No.2 has no further 2 of 3 44.APL.252.2022.doc grievances with regard to the pending complaint against the Applicants and therefore, I give consent for quashing of the same. 6. Since this is private issue between two private parties and the cause of action stands settled, and the Complainant having received his land back in 2012 itself, there can be no impediment in allowing the Petition. However in order to send a message across to such litigants who invoke criminal action and then ultimately decide to quash the same after many years, I direct the Applicants to pay costs of Rs. 15,000 to the Mumbai Police Welfare Fund bearing Account No: 465010100008693 and IFSC Code - UTIB0000465 in Axis Bank Limited. 7. Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (I) and (ii) which read thus:- “i That this Hon’ble Court in its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. be pleased to quash Regular Criminal Case. No. 198 of 2013 arising out of C.R. No. I – 168 of 2012 of Mahatma Phule Chowk Police Station, Kalyan Dist. Thane, pending to the file of the LD. JMFC, Kalyan. ii. That the applicants be discharged from all the charges levelled against them and they be set at liberty.” 8. Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 3 of 3 HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2026.08.21 20:34:01 +0530