1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 385 OF 2009 Gorakh s/o Baliram Nyhade ...Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents ..... Shri P.B.Patil, advocate for the petitioner Smt. R.R.Mane, A.P.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 ..... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 30 th JULY, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 1 Heard Shri P.B.Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. R.R.Mane, learned A.P.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2 petitioner was manhandled and though he was arrested for an alleged bailable offence and was ready to furnish the bail, he was not released on bail. He was released on bail after he was produced before the court. Therefore, departmental inquiry should be initiated against the officer concerned. The petitioner further prays to prosecute the respondent nos. 3 to 5 for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 342, 500, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention, placed reliance on the judgment reported in (1997) 1 SCC 416 [D.K.Basu vs State of West Bengal]. 4 Learned A.P.P. Smt. Mane submits that the charge sheet is filed against the petitioner on 25.5.2009 for an offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. 5 We have perused the investigating papers produced before the court. We find, in the facts of the case and in view of the judgment reported in Sakiri Vasu vs State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409, that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of filing a complaint. 3 6 Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Patil submits that the petitioner tried to file complaint against the persons in the police station, but he was not allowed to file the complaint. Therefore, he made representations to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Sakri on 10.3.2009 and to the District Collector on 16.3.2009. 7 We find, in case the petitioner is aggrieved, the petitioner is entitled to file a formal complaint in the police station or a complaint to the Magistrate. The petitioner is even entitled to approach and file representation to the Superintendent of Police, Dhule in respect of inquiry to be initiated against the officer concerned. In case the Superintendent of Police, Dhule receives the representation/complaint of the petitioner, then we direct the Superintendent of Police, Dhule to look into the matter. 8 With these directions, we dispose of the petition. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) dbm/crwp385.09