spb/- 1 wp2856-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2856 OF 2010 Ramesh Ranchhoddas Joshi & Ors. ... Petitioners. V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. --- Mr.R.K.Adsure for the Petitioners. Mrs. M.H.Mhatre, APP for the State. Mr. D.A.Nalawade for the Respondent No.3 ----- CORAM : P. V. HARDAS & M.N.GILANI,JJ. DATE : 28TH MARCH, 2011. P.C. 1 By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for transfer of investigation in which the petitioners are the accused. According to the petitioners a chargesheet has been filed in respect of an offence dated 28.11.2006. The grounds for transfer of the investigation, at the behest of the petitioners, which are urged before us by the learned counsel for the petitioners can briefly be summarized as follows : i That the petitioners were not present in Bombay on the alleged date i.e. on 28.11.2006 when a first information report has spb/- 2 wp2856-10.sxw been lodged in which the allegations are made against the petitioners. ii After investigation, a completely false chargesheet has been filed. iii Though in the earlier two reports lodged by the complainants therein, there is no reference about incident dated 28.11.2006 yet subsequently a report came to be lodged in which there is a reference about the incident dated 28.11.2006. iv Petitioner no.1 has been falsely roped in as accused in the present offence. v The petitioner no.4 has been falsely roped in as an accused in the present offence. 2 On the aforesaid grounds, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners pray for transfer of the investigation. 3 The learned APP on the basis of the affidavit in reply filed has urged before us that a request for transfer of investigation at the behest of the accused is not tenable, particulary in the light of the fact that the spb/- 3 wp2856-10.sxw chargesheet in the offence came to be submitted on 28.02.2008 and the case is pending for trial before the learned trial court. 4 In consideration of the aforesaid grounds urged for transfer of the investigation, according to us no case for transfer of the investigation is made out, particularly, in the light of the fact that the chargesheet came to be submitted on 28.02.2008 and the case is pending for trial. The aforesaid grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners do not amount sufficient grounds for quashing the existing chargesheet and order investigation de novo. In that light of the matter, there being no merit in the petition, the petition is summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. [M.N.GILANI,J.] [P.V. HARDAS, J.]