1 wp 649-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 649 OF 2011 M/s.Reliable Extraction Industries Pvt.Ltd. ...Petitioner vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Prakash Naik with Mr.Dipen Furia i/b. M/s.Niranjan & Co. for the Petitioner. Dr.F.R. Shaikh, APP for the State. Mr.S.V. Marwadi for Respondent Nos.6 and 7. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & U.D. SALVI, JJ. JUNE 21, 2011 P.C. :- 1 Heard Mr.Naik, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2 The petitioner-company was before us in earlier round in Criminal Writ Petition No.2575/2009 and the same was disposed off on 19th November, 2009. 2 wp 649-2011 In the said order, this Court noted that on completion of investigation in CR No.124/2009 registered with the Pydhonie Police Station, C- Summary Report was submitted before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 2nd Court at Mazgaon and therefore, the Court directed the learned Metropolitan Magistrate to issue notice to the petitioner. 3 Admittedly, such a notice was issued. The parties were heard and on 10th August, 2010, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate passed an order directing further investigation in CR No.124/2009. 4 Mr.Naik, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 10th August, 2010, the present Investigating Officer i.e. respondent no.7 did not 3 wp 649-2011 carry out any further investigation and hence, this writ petition in the second round. 5 Respondent no.7 Suresh Abhiman Choudhary, Police Inspector of the Pydhonie Police Station, has filed an affidavit before us today and he states that as per the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, he has undertaken further investigation and submitted a report dated 11th June, 2011 to the Police Prosecutor seeking his guidance. 6 We have seen the said report and it is obvious that further investigation was undertaken. 7 As and when respondent no.7 submits the report which, in our opinion, should be done within less than two weeks from today, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate would hear the parties and pass further appropriate orders. Hence, as of now, there is no case made out to 4 wp 649-2011 entertain this fresh petition. 8 The petition is rejected. (U.D. SALVI, J) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J)