vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.409 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.409 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.409 OF 2008 M/s.Ozone Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd. ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.Shirish Gupte with Amol Patankar for Applicant Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP, for Respondent-State Mr.S.V. Marwadi for Intervenor in Application No.114/2008 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: JUNE 19, 2008 JUNE 19, 2008 JUNE 19, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The application challenges the order dated 18.9.2007 in which the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai has observed that the matter was not found fit to be sent to the police under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for investigation as prayed for by the complainant. Instead, the Magistrate ordered that the complainant should give evidence in accordance with the provisions of section 200 of the Cr.P.C. The main contention raised by Mr.Gupte appearing for the petitioner is that an investigation under section 156(3) would ensure that the police would be able to discover material which would reveal the commission of serious offences by known and unknown persons. He submits that the complainant on his own would not be in a position to substantiate his charges of forgery and fabrication of : 2 : documents. He submits that the wide ramifications of the result of the forgeries can be revealed only with the assistance of the investigation agency. 2. In my opinion, these submissions cannot be accepted. The Metropolitan Magistrate by his order has directed the complainant to depose before him in accordance with section 200 of the Cr.P.C. Under section 202, the Magistrate can always postpone the issuance of process and can either enquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit for deciding whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding with the matter. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant would be handicapped if the police do not conduct an investigation under section 156(3), cannot be accepted. If the Magistrate finds after recording evidence under section 200 that it is necessary for further investigations in the matter, he can always order those investigations under section 202 of the Cr.P.C.. Thus, in my opinion, there is no need to set aside the order impugned in this application. 3. Hence, the application is dismissed. 4. In view of the dismissal of this application, : 3 : criminal application No.114 of 2008 is also dismissed.