-(1)- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1505 OF 2007 1. Appasaheb Ramu Redekar, 2. Gangubai Ramu Redekar, & 3. Kamal Sanjay Kotitkar. ..Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents. .. Mr.S.S.Redekar, Adv. for the Petitioners. Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State. Ms.Aparna D. Vhatkar, Adv. for Respondent No.2. .. CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR AND CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR AND CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 20, 2007. DATED : SEPTEMBER 20, 2007. DATED : SEPTEMBER 20, 2007. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard. 2. The learned APP undertakes to furnish copy of the statement of complainant recorded by the police, to the petitioners within three days from today. We accept the said statement. 3. Upon hearing the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State and on perusal of the investigation records produced for our perusal, it is apparent that -(2)- there is absolutely no cognizable case disclosed, either in the FIR or in the records so far collected by the investigating officer, as far as petitioner No.3 is concerned. Apparently the proceedings against the petitioner No.3 are liable to be quashed and accordingly the FIR and subsequent proceedings in the investigation, as far as petitioner No.3 is concerned, are quashed. 4. As regards the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are concerned, the learned Advocate for the petitioners craves leave to withdraw the petition to that extent. Petition is accordingly allowed to be withdrawn in respect of Petitioner Nos.1 & 2 with liberty to approach the Court in case need arises in the matter. 5. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. [R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J.] -(3)- [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]