1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2067 OF 2011 Jayesh Suresh Kale Petitioner versus Police Constable P.P.Jadhav and another Respondents Mr.Manoj Kadam for petitioner. Mr.D.P.Adsule, APP for respondents. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATE : 6th September 2011 PC : 1. The explanation offered by the concerned officer of the registry is unacceptable. The direction issued in the order dated 22nd August 2011 was peremptory one. Reasonable care ought to have been taken by the concerned officials that the second set of paper book was made available to the Court irrespective of the fact that the petitioner was to file the same or otherwise. We also place on record that the Deputy Registrar of the concerned Branch was also equally responsible to ensure that the papers were made available as the concerned department was under his control. Be that as it may, the explanation is taken on record with direction to the office to intimate the concerned officials to be careful in future failing which the Court will take serious view in future. Remark be entered in the service record of the concerned officials. 2. As regards merits, in view of the stand taken in the reply 2 affidavit, we are in agreement with the submission of the APP that the relief claimed in this petition cannot be countenanced as it is to challenge the document at Exhibit-B, page 12 of the paper book, which is only a report. The communication issued on 4th July 2011 is a report (Exhibit-B) sent by Police Havaldar, Tarapur to the Sub Divisional Officer. If the petitioner has any grievance with reference to the subsequent action based on this report, the petitioner will have to challenge the show cause notice or order/direction as may be issued by the appropriate authority. 3. This petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue such other remedy as may be permissible in law. All questions are left open. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)