1 2.wp.114-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.114 OF 2011 Mr.Naresh Kapoor. ..Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others. ..Respondents. .......... Nome for the Petitioner in the Morning Session. Mr.Onkar Gupte, i/b. Pradnya Dalvi-Wagle, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.N.V. Gangal, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 & 5. Mr.D.P. Adsule, A.P.P. for the State. .......... CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 24th JANUARY, 2011. P.C. 1. None appears for the Petitioner. The Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. Later on, Mr.Onkar Gupte for the Petitioner mentioned the matter requesting to recall the order dismissing the Petition for non- prosecution on the ground that when the matter was called out, he was busy in some other Court. 3. For the reasons mentioned, order dismissing the Petition for non-prosecution is recalled. Petition is restored to file to its original number. PPD 2 2.wp.114-11 4. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned A.P.P. for the State. 5. Considering the fact situation of the present case and opinion expressed by the Police Official to whom complaint was made by the Petitioner, in our opinion, this is not a case where discretionary writ jurisdiction should be invoked as the Petitioner is free to take recourse to the alternative efficacious remedy, if so advised. We say so, because in our opinion the dispute is essentially between the purchaser and seller of the property and the manner in which allegedly the purchaser has taken forcible possession thereof. Hence, this Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy as may be permissible in law. All questions are left open. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)