1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITON NO. 1435 OF 2010 Anandrao Ramchandra Pawar and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra ...Respondents ----- Mr.A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel i/b. Mr. Umesh R. Mankapure for Petitioners Mr.A.S. Shitole -APP for State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 22ND JUNE, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned APP for the State. 2. Grievance of the Petitioner in this writ petition is that an application was made by the Investigating Officer in a complaint which was already lodged for the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and a request was made to add the provisions of section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3. It is submitted that no reasons were assigned by the Investigating Officer for adding the said offence at a belated stage. It is further submitted that it was done on account of political rivalry between the Complainant and the Accused, who belonged to two different political parties. It is submitted that the complainant belongs to a party which is in power and the decision to add the offence under section 326 of the IPC has been made at the behest of the Minister, belonging to ruling party. It is also submitted that the public prosecutor has mechanically and without application of mind had endorsed the application filed before the learned Magistrate to add offence under section 326 of the IPC and the learned Magistrate has also granted permission to the Investigating Officer to add the said offence. It is submitted that this is done in order to see that the Applicants are not granted bail by the Magistrate. 4. It is a settled position in law that the Investigating Officer is a best person who can take a decision regarding the offences which are registered under the complaint filed by the Complainant and he can always make request to the Magistrate to add a particular offence though some other offences are registered against the accused. The Petitioner can always agitate before the Magistrate that though the 3 said offences are registered under section 326, in fact the said offences can be scaled down after perusal of the statement of the witnesses and the medical statements which were issued by the Civil Surgeon. 5. This being the position, in my view, this is not a fit case to quash the order while exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India and under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. No case is made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. All questions raised by the Petitioners in this petition are kept open and can be agitated before the appropriate Court. 6. Petition is,accordingly, disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)