* 1 * WP-2896-2010 8.11.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 2896 OF 2010 Ramdas K. Borse & Ors. ..... Petitioner V/S. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...... Respondents Mr. N.R Bubna, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for the State. CORAM :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 8th November, 2011. P.C. :- 1. Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. By consent, taken up for hearing immediately. 2. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and APP for the State. 3. This petition as filed originally was by three petitioners to challenge the show cause notices issued to each separately under Section 111 Criminal Procedure Code. Since the three petitioners could not have filed common petition to challenge the separate notices issued to them, by the order dated 7th June, 2011 at the request of the counsel for the petitioners, the petition * 2 * WP-2896-2010 8.11.2010 came to be treated as petition only on behalf of petitioner no.1 and liberty was granted to petitioners no.2 and 3 to file separate petitions. Mr. Bubna, learned counsel for the petitioners states that thereafter petitioners no.2 and 3 have not approached him. Thus, there is no petition on behalf of petitioners no.2 and 3. 4. Petitioner no.1 challenges the show cause notice dated 9th September, 2010 issued under Section 111 of Criminal Procedure Code in Chapter Case No. 89 of 2010. Perusal of the show cause notice shows that the same is based on stale grounds, i.e. on three incidents that had taken place on 13th January, 2005, 17th July, 2006 and 16th September, 2006 in respect of which proceedings under Section 37(1)(3)/135 of the Bombay Police Act, had been filed against the petitioner. In all the three incidents, petitioner no.1 is alleged to have participated in political events of protest over social issues. 5. Mr. Bubna, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that since all the three cases referred to in the show cause notice are stale cases, the same could not have been made basis for the proposed action. Mrs. Mane, learned APP, argues that there are further cases registered against petitioner no.1 in the year 2010. She has however not been able to point out the dates of the incident involved in the cases alleged to have been filed in the year 2010. In any case, such subsequent complaints are not made basis of the show cause * 3 * WP-2896-2010 8.11.2010 notice impugned in the present petition. Mr. Bubna, relies upon unreported decision of Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3541 of 2010 (Dinesh Vitthal Patil & anr. V/s. State of Maharashtra & anr.) decided on 22nd June, 2011 in which the Division Bench has disapproved of reliance upon stale material for issuance of show cause notice under Section 111 of Criminal Procedure Code as also the cases relating to political activity by the parties. The present case is completely covered by the observations of Division Bench in the decision cited. The impugned show cause notice therefore cannot be sustained. 4. In the circumstance, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The impugned show cause notice dated 9th September, 2010 issued against petitioner no.1 in Chapter Case No. 89 of 2010 (Court Case No. 76 of 2010) is quashed and set aside. [SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J]