1 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 375 OF 2011 Dinkar Dattatraya Kachare ... Applicant Versus Minakshi Panduranga Mane and Anr. ... Respondents Mr. S.S. Salunkhe, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V.M. Thorat, Advocate for Respondent no. 1. Mrs. M.M.Deshmukh, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 P.C. Heard. 2. The learned counsel submits that in order to squeeze the effect of civil litigation, by way of afterthought, proceedings under challenge are initiated by the respondent. The respondent has indeed accepted substantial amount of Rs. 7 lacs. from the applicant. The applicant seeks to quash the directions of investigation in terms of section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of 2 Supreme Court reported in (2009) 8 S.C.C. 751 in the case of Mohd Ibrahim and Others Vs. State of Bihar and another, particularly para 8 thereof. The observations of the Lordship in the said case relates to the allegations in respect of playing fraud, cheating and initiating prosecution. It does not embark upon the scope of section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 3. It is a matter of record that the learned Judge has not yet taken cognizance and consequently the present action is premature. Application is rejected. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.)