bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1704 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 1704 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 1704 OF 2007 Shankar Vithoba Mali & ors. ... Petitioners v/s 1. Smt. Balkabai Hari Mali 2. State of Maharashtra ... Respondents Mr.S.G.Deshmukh for the petitioners. Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa, A.P.P. for the respondent No.2 State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 29TH APRIL, 2008 29TH APRIL, 2008 29TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tasgaon in R.C.C.No.10 of 1991 directing accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 to remain present before the Court for framing charges under Sections 182, 193, 196, 419, 465, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter a revision application was filed by the accused before the Sessions Court on 17.11.1998. This revision application has been dismissed on 23.7.2007. The Sessions Court has directed the J.M.F.C., Tasgaon to dispose of the matter expeditiously. 2 2. Aggrieved by the orders of the J.M.F.C., Tasgaon as well as the Sessions Judge, Sangli, the accused have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 3. The learned advocate for the petitioners has argued that there is no material on record before the J.M.F.C. to frame the charges under the aforesaid sections; the process having been issued under Sections 419, 468, 471 and 474 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. Both the Courts below have found that there is sufficient material to frame the charges under other sections as well and, therefore, in my opinion, there is no need to interfere with the orders at this stage. The Magistrate may always decide whether, in fact, the charge should be framed under the aforesaid sections or should be confined to those offences in respect of which process has been issued. 5. In these circumstances, the writ petition is rejected.