- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.930/2008 Anita w/o Balbhim Kale. ...Petitioner.. Versus The State of Maharashtra & 13 others. ...Respondents... ..... Shri S.S. Choudhary, Advocate for petitioner. Shri K.B. Choudhary, APP for respondent nos.1 to 3. Respondent nos.4 to 14 served. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & A.V. POTDAR , JJ. DATE: 02.09.2010 PER COURT : 1] This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying therein for issuance of a writ for quashing and setting aside the investigation carried out by the Police officers in respect of rime No.16/2007 registered at the Police Station, - 2 - Karjat, for an offence punishable u/s 3 (1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under other relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner also prays for issuance of a writ directing that the investigation be carried out by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and to submit a fresh charge-sheet. 2] Learned APP informs that charge-sheet has been filed in the Special Court on 9.6.2008. It further appears on the basis of the instructions of the leaned APP that the aforesaid trial is pending on the file of the Special Judge assigned with the case. 3] The principal ground on which the petitioner has prayed for the aforesaid reliefs is that the investigation has been carried out by an officer, who is below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and, therefore, has prayed for the reliefs adverted to above. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondent nos.2 & 3 have filed their affidavit in reply and in the affidavit in reply, it is stated that Crime No.61/2007 was registered at Karjat Police Station on the basis of a complaint filed by Anita Balbhim Kale i.e. present petitioner. Offence punishable u/s 3(1)(x) of the Prevention of Atrocities Act and u/s 452, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered. It is further stated in the affidavit in reply that the investigation was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri D.G. Shinde. It is further submitted that on completion of the investigation, the investigating officer Shri D.G. Shinde has - 3 - submitted the charge sheet on 9.6.2008 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate at Karjat and the case is registered as RTC No.88/2008. The respondents in their affidavit in reply have denied that the investigation in the said crime was conducted by an officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Incidentally we may state that the Deputy Superintendent of Police has been cited as a witness on behalf of the prosecution. 4] In the light of the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondent nos.1 & 2 stating therein that the investigation has been conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, according to us, there is no merit in the present petition and the same, therefore, deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.V. Potdar , J.) (P.V. Hardas, J.) ndk/cr29102