1 wp1916.10 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1916 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.445 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1916 OF 2010 Sheila P. Coutinho ....Petitioner. Vs. Senior Inspector of Police, Crime Detection Branch, CID & ors. ....Respondents. Ms. Archana Khan with Mr. Raymond i/b. Raymond & Co. for petitioner., advocate for intervener. Mr. J.P.Yagnik, APP for State. Mr. M.K.Kocharekar with Prakash Vare, advocate for interveners. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED:- NOVEMBER 24, 2010. P.C. 1. The grievance made in this Petition is about evasiveness of the Investigating Officer in completing the investigation in relation to the case No. 19/I & R/2004, 59/ISR/05. Insofar as this grievance is concerned, learned APP submits that Investigating Officer is encountering two hurdles in progress of the investigation. Firstly, the accused named in the compliant are not cooperating with the investigation and are refusing to produce original copy of 2 wp1916.10 the agreement in question. The second difficulty is on account of non- cooperation in giving specimen signature by the named accused so that the allegations made in the complaint against them can be inquired into and taken to its logical end. 2. Insofar as non-production of original documents are concerned, by separate order, today we have disposed of the Criminal application filed by the Accused No.6 being Criminal Application No.3625 of 2010. It will be now open to the Investigating Officer to compel the accused to produce original documents in their possession by taking recourse to appropriate measures in accordance with law. In so far as obtaining of specimen signature is concerned, the Investigating Officer may take recourse to similar measures as for production of original documents, for which he is competent on account of the expansive provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, so as to continue with the investigation and complete the same. 3. Insofar as the second relief claimed in this Petition is concerned, that is worked out in the light of the order passed by us in the companion Criminal Application No. 3625 of 2010. We are conscious of the fact that the said application is filed only by accused No.6 and not by other accused. But for the 3 wp1916.10 reasons recorded therein, we hope and trust that the Investigating Officer will exercise his powers including by compelling the concerned accused to produce the original agreement/documents in their possession, if any. 4. In the light of the above, nothing survives for consideration in this Petition. The same is disposed of. 5. In view of the order passed in Writ Petition, nothing survives for consideration in the criminal application. The same is disposed of. (A.P.BHANGALE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)