1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.966 OF 2006 Ashfaque Ahmed Ansari .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr.V.A.Shastry for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Shitole A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 26TH JUNE, 2006 DATED : 26TH JUNE, 2006 DATED : 26TH JUNE, 2006 P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Mr.Shastry, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the question as to whether the prosecution has power to apply to the court for reinvestigation after filing of the charge-sheet. In support of this proposition he placed reliance upon the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Shyama Charan Shyama Charan Shyama Charan Dubey Vs. State of U.P. 1990 CRI.L.J.456 Dubey Vs. State of U.P. 1990 CRI.L.J.456 Dubey Vs. State of U.P. 1990 CRI.L.J.456. The learned Judge in the impugned order has categorically referred to the powers of police for conducting further investigation and powers of the court to direct such investigation. In the circumstances, as claimed by the accused, I do not find any prejudice being done to him by the impugned order. In the result, I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned in this petition. The petition is dismissed. 2 2 2 (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)