1 64.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.64 OF 2011 Ms.Yvonne John Philips Gonsalves and now known as Mrs.Yvonee Jerry Simoes ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.120 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.64 OF 2011 Ms.Yvonne John Philips Gonsalves and now known as Mrs.Yvonee Jerry Simoes ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents And Mr.Virendra Kumar Jhamb & Ors. ...Applicants/ Interveners ...... Mrs.V.R.Raje for Petitioner. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, A.P.P. for State. Mr.A.P.Mundargi with Mr.Rahul Hakani & Ms.Divya Shah i/b Divya Shah & Co. for interveners. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- MARCH 1, 2011. P.C. 1. In terms of order dated 7th February, 2011, investigation has already 2 64.11 been transferred to Economic Offence Wing, Crime Branch before 23rd February, 2011. This information is revealed by the learned A.P.P. on instructions. 2. In that sense, nothing survives for consideration in the present Petition as the principal relief claimed in the Petition is worked out. However, in the present Writ Petition, intervention application has been filed by some of the accused named in the F.I.R. According to them, the factual position stated before the Court as noted in the order dated 7th February, 2011 relating to merits of the claim of the petitioners is incorrect and misleading. It is not necessary for us to go into that aspect of the matter, as the purport of the order is only to transfer investigation from the local police to Crime Branch. 3. Needless to observe that the investigation will be proceeded on its own merits and in fairness to all concerned, including the accused. The opinion on any factual matrix recorded in our order will not come in the way of fair investigation which, as aforesaid, will have to be proceeded in accordance with law. The applicants/accused are free to pursue other remedies as may be permissible in law, which will have to be decided on its 3 64.11 own merits without being influenced by any observation in our earlier order. 4. The Petition is disposed of on the above terms. 5. For the reasons mentioned hitherto, even the criminal application for intervention is disposed of. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)