1 wp-1174-2011 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1174 OF 2011 Jagrut Mahila Samiti ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents Mr.A.M.Saraogi for petitioner. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP for State. Mr.Rahul P. Walvekar for Resp.nos.2 and 3. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. July 19, 2011. P.C. 1. We have heard Mr.Saraogi, the learned counsel for the petitioner which claims to be a registered Society and to look after the welfare of the women members. The petitioner prays for recall of the order passed by this Court on 20/10/2010 and 23/11/2010 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 2870 of 2010. 2 wp-1174-2011 2. Criminal Writ Petition No.2870 of 2010 was filed by the present respondent nos. 2 and 3 with a grievance that the investigation in the complaint submitted by them was not undertaken. This Court by its order dated 20/10/2010 transferred the investigation to DCB, CID from the IO of the concerned police station and the investigation is presently with the DCB, CID, Mumbai. 3. The petitioner now submits before us that some of its letters were fabricated by the respondent nos.2 and 3 and those letters would have material bearing on the on going investigations. 4. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20/10/2010 or the subsequent order of modification dated 23/11/2010, its remedy lies somewhere else. In any case the petitioner was not a party in the said petition. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, we have not been shown that the petitioner has any connection with the on going investigation pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.2870 of 2010. If the petitioner is aggrieved that respondent nos.2 and 3 have fabricated some documents, its remedy 3 wp-1174-2011 to file a private complaint before the appropriate Court is not taken away. 5. Petition is rejected. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)