1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Cri. Writ Petition NO. 803/2009 Eknath Pandurang Patil & others ( V. ) The State of Maharashtra WITH Cri. Writ Petition No. 1130/2009 Pramodsing Eknath Patil Vs. Inspector of Police and others Mr. A.M. Bhalerao, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. D.R. Korde, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 / State. CORAM : [A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2 At present, it is rather difficult to peruse the material which the police collected against the present petitioners to come to a definite conclusion as to whether there is sufficient ground to proceed against them. No doubt, there are indications on record which I perused in the form of dying declaration, the complaint of Gulabsingh dated 17/04/2009 that the main thrust of the prosecution case is probably against absconding accused Raisingh – the son of the petitioner no.1. However, it is too early to form a definite opinion and give a finding on this question. Despite the offence having been registered in April, 2009 till today, 2 the Police have not filed any charge sheet. If the Police decide to file charge sheet against all the petitioners including absconding accused then the petitioners would have ample opportunity to examine the material against them and for making their application for discharge etc.. Such liberty is always there with the petitioners. It is high time now that the Police should decide their further action in the matter. Whether they succeed in arresting the absconding accused or not, will have to decide the fate of the petitioners, as soon as possible. I am therefore, directing the Police to decide as to whether they want to file charge sheet or not against the present petitioners within two weeks. In view of this, both the petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. Dt :29th April,2010 [A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] tsk/