1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1044 OF 2008 DIST.: MUMBAI Pravin Namdev Khadtale ...Petitioner Versus Ramchandra Aher & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Amin Solkar for the Petitioner Mr. D.S. Mhaispurakr, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and A.A.KUMBHAKONI,JJ. DATE: JULY 15, 2008 P. C.:- The petitioner wants respondent No.2 to conduct an inqury against respondent No.1. He also wants quashing of F.I.R dated 22nd February, 2008 registered with Kurar Police Station at LAC No. 171 of 2008 by respondent No.4. 2. The main ground for challenging the F.I.R. is that the F.I.R. was registered at the instance of Mumbai Municipal Corporation, and in the letter they sent to the police, the name of the petitioner was not 2 mentioned. However, his name figured in the F.I.R. 3. Counter states that investigation is pending, and according to the investigation so far conducted, it has been revealed that certain structures were demolished, which were re-constructed unauthorisedly, and the petitioner was also participating in re-construction. 4. We cannot interfere in the matter at this stage. The F.I.R. and the investigation so far carried out disclose the prima facie involvement of the petitioner. 5. As regards directing inquiry against respondent No.1, it is stated in the counter that on the basis of a complaint filed by the petitioner against the Senior Inspector of Police, Kurar Police Station, an inquiry was conducted, and the charges were found baseless. It was not mentioned in the counter affidavit as to who conducted the inquiry. Now, it is stated at the Bar by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the inquiry was conducted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police. 6. For these reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. BILAL NAZKI, J. 3 A.A. KUMBHAKONI, J.