1 pil-19-10 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 19 OF 2010 Shri Namdev Wagh .. Petitioner Vs. 1. State of Maharashtra & 2 ors. .. Respondents Mr. P. M. Havnur for petitioner. Mr. Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with Mr. P.A. Pol, PP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U. D. SALVI, JJ. SEPTEMBER 27, 2010. P.C. We have heard Mr. Havnur, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kadam, the learned Advocate General. As per the affidavit-in-reply filed by Shri Yogesh Gawade, PI, Bhagyanagar Police Station, Nanded, on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner, C.R. No. 364 of 2007 came to be registered with Bhagyanagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 471 and 34 of IPC and on 14/10/2007 his supplementary statement 2 pil-19-10 was recorded. The petitioner once again gave his statement on 30/12/2007. The IO, on completion of the investigation and after obtaining the opinion of the hand writing expert, has submitted the charge-sheet on 18/7/2008 in the court of the JMFC at Nanded. Telephonic intimation was also given to the petitioner about the filing of the charge-sheet and thereafter on 23/4/2009, the IO recorded an additional statement of the petitioner and the same has been forwarded to the court on 30/4/2009 under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. It has been further pointed out that the court below has framed the charge on 30/3/2010. Mr. Kadam the learned Advocate General also stated that after the Committee’s report dated 8/12/2009 was submitted and which report is the subject matter of this petition, Shri Wadwalkar, Principal, has approached the Aurangabad Bench of this court and filed Writ Petition No. 8644 of 2010 and notices have been issued on 23/9/2010. It is thus clear that the petitioner’s complaint was registered, investigated into and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent court. As has been held in the case of Union of India and ors. vs. Sushilkumar Modi and ors. [(1998) 8 SCC 661] that once the charge- 3 pil-19-10 sheet has been filed on completion of investigation, a writ petition seeking directions to investigate the complaint cannot be continued further as the process of monitoring by the High Court must come to an end. So far as the petitioner’s prayer on the report submitted by the Committee on 8/12/2009 is concerned, the said report is already a subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No. 8644 of 2010 and the petitioner may, if so advised, intervene in the said petition before the Aurangabad Bench. Hence, nothing survives further in this petition and the same is rejected. (U.D. SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)