AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.484 OF 2008 Mahmood Ali Mohammad Basheer .... Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. A.R. Prajapati for the petitioner. Ms. U.V. Kejariwal, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. A.V. Jain i/b M/s. A.V. Jain & Associates for respondent 3. Mr. D.S. Sakhalkar i/b Ms. Manisha kumbhar for respondents 4 to 9. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ. DATED : 22ND JULY, 2008. P.C.:- 1. The basic grievance of the petitioner, as stated in the petition, is that respondent 3 Mr. Mahendra Chheda in collusion and connivance with respondent 4 Mr. Prakash Mahadeo Parab has prepared false and fabricated documents of the bogus members and entered their names along with the names of eligible members in Annexure-“II” and submitted the list to the office of the SRA, AJN 2 MHADA, Collector, BMC, Mantralaya, etc. and got the eligibility certificate. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that so far as this grievance is concerned, he has already approached the appropriate authority and, therefore, he is not pressing it. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that one Abdul Jabbar was killed in the jurisdiction of D.N. Nagar Police Station. He was a member of Juhu Ekta Co-operative Housing Society Limited of which the petitioner is also a member. Learned counsel states that the petitioner and members of his family also apprehend that they may be similarly attacked and, therefore, police protection be granted to them. Learned counsel further states that the petitioner has addressed a letter/representation to the Senior Inspector of Police, D.N. Nagar Police Station, Andheri, inter alia, praying for police protection, on which no action is taken by the police. 4. Learned A.P.P. states that the said Jabbar was killed by one coconut vendor on account of money transaction and that murder AJN 3 has not arisen out of the dispute which is narrated in the petition. She states that the petitioner should have addressed the said letter/representation praying for police protection to the Commissioner of Police, Bombay. In our opinion, in such matter, threat perception of the Commissioner of Police is of utmost importance. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he will address a letter/representation to the Commissioner of Police, Bombay, requesting for police protection. If such a letter/representation is received, we direct the Commissioner of Police, Bombay to consider it in accordance with law. We, however, make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the grievance of the petitioner and his request for police protection. The Commissioner of Police shall consider the representation independently. 5. Learned A.P.P. states that in connection with the representation dated 23/2/2008 the police have repeatedly called upon the petitioner to the D.N. Nagar Police Station, Andheri. However, he has not visited the D.N. Nagar Police Station. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner's wife is in hospital. He states that the petitioner will attend the D.N. Nagar AJN 4 Police Station after two weeks in connection with his complaint. No further orders are necessary. The petition is disposed of. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]