1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1090 OF 2009 Meerabai w/o Sakaram Jadhav, Age : 52, Occ. Agricultural, R/o Wasanwadi, Tq. dist. Beed ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through the Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Fort, Mumbai 2. The Superintendent of Police, Beed, Tq. Dist. Beed 3. The Police Inspector, Police Station Shivaji Nagar, At Post Dist. Beed 4. The Police Inspector, Police Station Beed (Gramin), At Post Dist. Beed 5. Dinkar s/o Kashinath Jadhav Age : 40, Occu. Service, R/o Wasanwadi, Presently at Pangri Road, Opposite Umakiran, Tq. Dist Beed 6. Vijay s/o Dinkar Jadhav, Age : 25, Occu. Business, R/o Opposite Umakiran, Tq. Dist. Beed 2 7. Ajay s/o Dinkar Jadhav, Age : 22, Occ. Agriculture R/o Opposite Umakiran, Tq. Dist. Beed 8. Keshav s/o Narhari Gholap, Age : 35, Occ. Business, R/o Wasanwadi, Tq. Dist. Beed ..RESPONDENTS Mr N.K. Tungar, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr S.D. Kaldate, A.P.P. for respondent no.1. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATE : 6th January, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V. HARDAS, J.) At the outset, Shri Tungar, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition insofar as relief which is sought at prayer clause (B) to the petition. Leave granted. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn to the extent of prayer clause (B) to the petition. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks oral leave to amend the petition for incorporating a relief of issuance of a writ directing respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 10.10.2006, which is said to be pending. We accordingly grant leave to amend the petition. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 3 3. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 4. It appears that the petitioner filed a report with the Shivaji Nagar police station, Beed and the Rural police station at Beed. According to the petitioner, despite lodging of the report which disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, respondents have not registered an offence against the offenders named in the said report. The petitioner, therefore, has filed the present petition seeking relief of directing the respondents to register an offence against the offenders named in the said report. The petitioner at the outset very fairly stated that the petitioner withdraws this petition insofar as the aforesaid direction is prayed for. The petitioner has amended the petition for issuance of a writ directing the respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 10.10.2006, which is said to be pending. The aforesaid representation has been addressed to the Commissioner of Police. 5. We accordingly allow this petition and direct the Commissioner of Police to transmit the representation of the petitioner dated 10.10.2006 to the respondent no.2 i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Beed, Taluka and District Beed for a decision in accordance with law. This be done within two weeks from today and the Superintendent of Police, Beed i.e. 4 respondent no.2 is further directed to decide the said representation in accordance with law within a period of three weeks of the receipt of the said representation from the Commissioner of Police. The learned A.P.P. undertakes to communicate this order to the concerned respondents. 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. 7. Copy duly authenticated be provided to the learned A.P.P. to act upon. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) amj/criwp1090.09