1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.421 OF 2011 Vithal s/o Janardhan Bade .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents Mr V.M.Chate, Advocate for petitioner Mr S.K.Tambe, A.P.P. for respondents 1 and 2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 19th July 2011 PER COURT This is a petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India by which the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing respondents 1 and 2 to register an offence against respondents 3 and 4. 2. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor states on instructions that pursuant to the death of deceased, an A.D. report came to be submitted and an inquiry came to be conducted in respect of the said accidental death report. The final opinion has been submitted to the superiors of the Investigating Officer and the same is pending consideration. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further points out that the petitioner had filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dharur, district Beed for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the present respondents No.3 and 4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has tendered before us a copy of the order passed by the trial Magistrate permitting the present petitioner to withdraw the said complaint. It appears that the petitioner had 2 withdrawn the private complaint, which he had filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Dharur, which was registered as Regular Criminal Case No. 107 of 2010. The filing of the aforesaid complaint case and its withdrawal has not been disclosed in this petition by the petitioner. 3. Apart from the question of suppression of vital information and material from the Court, we find that the prayer which the petitioner had made, i.e. directing respondents 1 and 2 to register an offence against respondents 3 and 4 cannot be granted to the petitioner in the light of the judgment of Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee Vs. Union of India, (2007) 6 SCC 171 and in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P., AIR 2008 Supreme Court 907. Apart from that the petition does not disclose that any report had been lodged by the petitioner in the police station. In that light of the matter, therefore, we do not find any justification for entertaining this petition. The petitioner may avail the remedies, if available to the petitioner in law. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. ( A.V. POTDAR, J. ) ( P.V. HARDAS, J. ) (vvr/421.11criwp)