1 Cri.W.P. 930.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 930 OF 2009 Sau. Suvarna W/o Hemkant Pawar ... Petitioner V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra and ors. ... Respondents ... Mr. Paresh B. Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, A.P.P. for respondent-State. Mr. Sachin Bhise, Advocate h/f. Mr. S.B. Bhapkar, Advocate for respondent no.5 Mr. V.B. Patil, Advocate for respondent no.6 ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. DATED : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2009 ORAL ORDER 1] This is a petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus and the petitioner also prays for transferring the investigation from the respondents to the C.I.D. or the C.B.I. 2] It appears that a complaint came to be lodged with the Police on 10.5.2009 by the petitioner, alleging that her husband had been abducted by respondent nos. 5 and 6. Immediately an offence came to be registered on the same day 2 Cri.W.P. 930.2009 and thereafter, the accused came to be arrested. The investigation of the said crime is still in progress. According to the learned A.P.P., narco analysis test, lie detector tests have been conducted. 3] Since the investigation is in progress and as we do not find any fault with the investigation, according to us, the petitioner is not entitled for transfer of the investigation either to the C.I.D. or to the C.B.I. However, if the petitioner so desires, the petitioner may submit a representation to the Government seeking transfer of the investigation to the C.I.D. 4] The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the remand form submitted by the investigation officer dated 4.6.2009, to urge before us that the investigation officer had recorded to his prima facie satisfaction that the husband of the petitioner was in custody of one of the accused. The accused are respondents 5 and 6. Respondent no.6 is represented by Shri V.B. Patil. Respondent no.6 denies that the husband of the 3 Cri.W.P. 930.2009 petitioner is in his custody or that the husband of the petitioner is illegally detained by him. 5] In that light of the matter, according to us since the investigation is in progress, relief of issuance of writ of habeas corpus can not be granted to the petitioner. There is nothing on record to indicate as of this moment that the husband of the petitioner has been illegally detained by respondents 5 and 6. The notice of habeas corpus issued to the respondents, therefore stands discharged. For the reasons stated above, the Petition stands dismissed in respect of the other reliefs with no order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) arp