1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION NO.141 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.464 OF 2010 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.464 OF 2010 WITH APPLICATION NO.118 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.464 OF 2010 WITH APPLICATION NO.141 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.464 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr A.P.Mundargi, Sr.Counsel i/b Mr Sandesh Dehspande, for the Applicant- Intervenor in Application No.141 of 2010. Mr Nitin Pradhan i/b Mrs Ameeta Kuttikrishnan for the applicant- Intervenor in Application No.118 of 2010. Mr M.S.Mohite i/b Mrs Sarita Donde, for the petitioner in writ petition. Mrs S.D.Shinde, APP, for the State. Mr Sameer Gilani, API, D.N.Nagar Police Station present. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE AND R.V.MORE, JJ. DATE : 19/04/2010 PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties and the Intervenors. T 2 On 8.4.10, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the following directions were issued. “2. We have perused the material placed before us. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we issue direction to the petitioner to approach the Investigating Officer and produce the documents before him which, according to the petitioner, are forged by respondent no.1. We hope and trust that the I.O would look into all such documents and take further steps in respect thereof and submit his report to the Court on 19.4.2010. The petitioner to approach the I.O within three days from today. The petitioner is also directed to furnish his Mobile number to the Investigating Officer today itself. It is open to the I.O to call the petitioner whenever his presence is required for seeking clarification or further information while carrying out the investigation.” Today the learned APP has placed on record a report of Samir Gilani, an Investigating Officer, dated 19.4.2010. It appears that in pursuance of the direction issued on last occasion, the petitioner approached the Investigating Officer and handed him over the 3 documents in his possession. In the report, it is mentioned that on examining the documents submitted by the petitioner, it was found that ten names in Annexure-II are not genuine. The learned APP submits that on the basis of the information furnished by the petitioner, they are carrying out further investigation in MECR No.4 of 2009. She submits that the Investigating Officer would require another two months time to complete the investigation. We are satisfied that the Investigating Office is carrying out the investigation properly and we do not find any reason to transfer the investigation to any other agency as prayed in the petition. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of. We hope and trust that the investigation will be completed expeditiously and appropriate report will be filed before the concerned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate shall thereafter pass orders in accordance with law. 4 Insofar as the Intervenors’ applications are concerned, they have denied all allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition and in view thereof, their applications are also disposed of, keeping all contentions of the Intervenors open. All contentions of the petitioner are also kept open. While disposing of this petition, we shall not be understood to have examined the merits of the case and the Court, where the proceedings are pending in respect of MECR No.4 of 2009, shall decide the same on merits in accordance with law. (R.V.MORE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) 5