1 wp2419.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 2419 of 2010 Mukesh Kamlakar Patil ..Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ..Respondents Mr. Yogesh Virarkar – advocate for the petitioner. Ms. M.H. Mhatre – APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ DATED :- DECEMBER 16, 2010. P.C. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. It is not in dispute that chargesheet has already been filed before the concerned Court. The grievance of the Petitioner is primarily with regard to deficiencies in the investigation and on the basis of which the police report has been filed. In such a case, it is open to the Complainant to 2 wp2419.10.sxw approach the Magistrate and to persuade the Magistrate to issue directions to the Investigating Agency to undertake further investigation on matters that may be necessary for administration of justice. All questions in that behalf can be examined by the Magistrate on its own merits in accordance with law. 3. We, therefore, decline to exercise our discretionary writ jurisdiction and leave it open to the Petitioner to persuade other remedies available to him which will be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. 4. Counsel for the Petitioner did make an attempt to persuade us to take the view that the present Investigating Agency is not reliable. However, going by the averments in the Writ Petition, there is nothing to indicate that the present Investigating Agency was either biased or was favouring the accused as such. In absence of such allegations, the argument canvassed before us across the bar cannot be countenanced. 5. Accordingly, Petition is disposed of on the above terms. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)