1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2326 OF 2007 Nanikram Lachhmandas Rohra ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents. .... Mr. C.R. Dave for the Petitioner. Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State. Mr. P.J. Thorat for Respondent No.4. .... CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI and, DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ. 26th August, 2008. P.C. : 1. The basic grievance of the Petitioner in this petition is that the Fourth Respondent has fabricated certain documents and filed them before Respondent No.2. He has therefore prayed that the CBI or Anti-Corruption Bureau of the State or Crime Branch be directed to prosecute the Fourth Respondent and the persons involved in fabrication of the said documents. 2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner at some length. We have also heard learned counsel 2 appearing for the Fourth Respondent. We have perused the affidavit filed by the Fourth Respondent. Admittedly, the Petitioner has neither approached the concerned police station nor has he filed any complaint before the concerned Magistrate alleging fabrication of documents by the Fourth Respondent. It cannot be presumed that the police or the concerned Magistrate will not look into his grievance if he approaches them. It is pointed out that Learned Magistrate will not be in a position to grant the Petitioner's prayer for investigation by CBI. There is substance in this submission. But the question of this Court directing CBI or any other agency to investigate would come only if the police fail to take action. The Petitioner cannot directly approach this Court and ask for CBI investigation. Inasmuch as the Petitioner has not approached the police or the concerned Magistrate, it is not possible for us to entertain this Petition at this stage. Needless to say that if the Petitioner files a complaint with the concerned police station or the concerned Magistrate, his grievance will be examined and if it is found that it is necessary to take action, the concerned police station or the concerned Magistrate will take steps in 3 accordance with law. We, however, make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of either parties, nor have we issued any directions to the police or the concerned Magistrate. We make it clear that all the contentions raised by the Petitioner in this Petition are kept open. It will be open to him to agitate the grievances made by him in this Petition. We further make it clear that he will be entitled to make grievances in respect of the contents of the affidavit which the Fourth Respondent has filed in this Court. Needless to say that contentions of the Fourth Respondent are also kept open. The Petition is disposed of in the aforestated terms. (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.) (DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.)