Case Note & Summary
This matter concerns a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Bombay by three petitioners, namely Govind Kakuram Kataria, Sunny Govind Kataria, and Kunal Govind Kataria, all residents of Mumbai. The petition sought quashing of a criminal case, specifically C.C. No. 425/PW/2011, which was pending before the 9th Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate at Bandra, Mumbai. The case arose from FIR No. 578 of 2010, registered on 25th November 2010 at Khar Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 325 (voluntarily causing hurt), 427 (mischief), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. The respondents in the petition were the State of Maharashtra, represented by the Khar Police Station, and the original complainant, Dhanraj Rochiraj Sawlani. The petitioners were represented by advocates Ms. Poonam Ankleshwaria, Mr. Prathamesh Parkar, and Ms. Atithi Abhay, while the State was represented by Smt. Savita M. Yadav, Additional Public Prosecutor. The judgment was delivered on 12th June 2025 by a division bench comprising Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Rajesh S. Patil, with Justice Gadkari authoring the opinion. The core legal issue before the Court was whether the High Court, in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, should quash the pending criminal proceedings. The judgment excerpt provided does not contain any details regarding the factual background of the dispute, the arguments advanced by counsel for either side, the court's reasoning, or the final decision rendered. Therefore, no substantive legal analysis, ratio decidendi, or operative directions can be extracted from the text. The excerpt merely sets out the prayer for quashing and the basic procedural posture of the case. Consequently, this summary is limited to the information that is explicitly available in the provided fragment of the judgment.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceedings pending against the Petitioners are liable to be quashed in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India?
Final Decision
Not mentioned in the provided judgment excerpt.
