spb/- 1 wp553-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 553 OF 2011 Tanzeem Khaja Shaikh & Ors. ... Petitioners . V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents. --- Mr. Sayed Ali Ansari for the Petitioners. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State. ----- CORAM : P. V. HARDAS & M.N.GILANI,JJ. DATE : 13TH APRIL, 2011. PC: 1 This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the first information report lodged by the respondent no.2 against the petitioners on the basis of the direction issued by the Judicial Magistrate under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing of the order, issuing process and to dismiss the private complaint. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioners has urged before us that the prosecution which has been initiated on the basis of the report of the respondent no.2 is “a false prosecution” and “a bogus case has been filed against the petitioners”. It is also urged before us by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the first information report is highly belated and on that count itself it is apparent that the prosecution which has been spb/- 2 wp553-11.sxw initiated against the petitioners is on the basis of the truncate charges. The learned counsel for the petitioners referred to the order passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-2, Malegaon dated 05.02.2011, granting anticipatory bail to some of the petitioners and particularly the observations of the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge -2 Malegaon are as quoted under : “If this fact was disclosed to husband Salim Beg on the first night of marriage, question remains as to how Salim Beg kept mum from July 2010 to 30.11.2010. There is no explanation for this delay”. In our opinion, the observations made by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-2 Malegaon while deciding the application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have to be understood in the context of the application which the Additional Sessions Judge was called upon to decide. The aforesaid finding cannot be considered as any finding recorded on merits. The question whether, the first information report is belated and the effect of the belated first information report on the trial is a matter to be examined by the court after the parties lead their evidence. There is no straight-jacket formula on the basis of which, merely on account of belated first information report, the prosecution can be quashed or held to be false or bogus. In respect of the falsity of the allegation, prima facie, it will have to be established during the trial and it is only thereafter the court would be able to pronounce upon the falsity. Perusal of the report, prima facie, indicates that there is an information of the cognizable offence. spb/- 3 wp553-11.sxw 3 In that light of the matter, therefore, we do not see any merit in the petition and accordingly dismiss this petition summarily with no order as to costs. [M.N.GILANI,J.] [P.V. HARDAS, J.]