1 9.wp.2152-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2152 OF 2010 Sudhadevi Phoolkant Choudhary. ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra and four others. ..Respondents. .......... Mr.Sushan Kunjuraman, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the State. .......... CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 27th JANUARY, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Perused reply affidavit filed by the Police Inspector, Bhoiwada Police Station and accompaning documents filed thereto. From the medical report now produced before the Court dated 27.11.2010 issued under the signatures of Professor, Department of Pathology and Professor & Head, Department of Pathology, it is amply clear that the cause of death of the deceased was natural. In view of this medical opinion, the grievance of the Petitioner that the cause of death was unnatural cannot be countenanced. The entire Petition proceeds on the premise that the Investigating Officer failed to examine the possibility of cause of death of the deceased being unnatural. PPD 2 9.wp.2152-10 3. Indeed, the Petitioner may be justified in pointing out that although the medical certificate of cause of death issued by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai dated 26.8.2006 mentions that histopathological examination was pending, no effort was made by the Investigating Officer to obtain said examination test until the present Petition came to be filed. This is of no avail to the Petitioner because eventually the medical certificate issued by the Department of Pathology of KEM Hospital dated 27.11.2010 records that the cause of death of the deceased was natural. If it is so, the assumption of the petitioner to persuade the Court to issue directions to the Respondents to include offence under Section 302 of IPC in the existing FIR is devoid of merits. Petition, therefore, fails. The relief in terms of prayer clause (b) is dependent on the finding which was likely to be recorded in the context of prayer clause (a). When the Petitioner has failed to persuade us to grant prayer clause (a), question of grant of prayer clause (b) does not arise. Accordingly, Petition is dismissed. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)