JUDGMENT :

Mangesh S. Patil, J.

Heard the learned Senior Advocate Mr. Hon in Criminal Writ Petition No. 597/2023 and Ms. Talekar in Criminal Writ Petition No. 615/2023 as also the learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Kale.

2. Rule in both the Criminal Writ Petitions. It is made returnable forthwith. Learned Public Prosecutor waives service for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and learned advocate Ms. Talekar for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the former petition. Learned Public Prosecutor waives service for all the respondents in latter petition. Both the matters arise out of the same set of facts, one seeks quashment of the order passed by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereas the other petition seeks implementation of the self-same order expeditiously. Hence this common judgment.

3. The facts leading to the filing of these petitions can be summarized as under:

(a) The petitioner is a Co-Operative Society duly registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960, running a sugar factory (hereinafter referred to as ‘the sugar factory’). It had availed of the loan and states to have distributed it to the farmers for development an