Cri.W.P.No.1019/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1019 OF 2010 Mohammad Bahauddin Ziauddin Kazi .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents Mr H.A.Joshi Advocate for petitioner Mr N.H.Borade, A.P.P. for respondents 1 to 4 Mr Pradeep Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.5 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE : 8th February 2011 PER COURT 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing the respondents 3 and 4 to register an offence on the complaint filed by the petitioner on 24.10.2010. The aforesaid relief prayed for by the petitioner is not available to the petitioner in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee Vs. Union of India, (2007) 6 SCC 171 and also in the light of the judgment in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P., AIR 2008 Supreme Court 907. The petitioner has alternate remedy available in respect of filing of a private complaint case before the Magistrate. 2. The petitioner by virtue of prayer clause (C) to the petition prays for issuance of a writ directing respondents to take immediate prohibitory Cri.W.P.No.1019/2010 2 steps to restrain the public from offering namaz at land Gut No.718, 719, 722, 723, 1109/1 and 1109/2 situated at Shevgaon, Taluka Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar. By virtue of prayer clause (D) to the petition the petitioner has prayed for taking appropriate action against the respondents for not registering the offence on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner. 3. In respect of taking prohibitory steps, the respondents in their affidavit-in-reply have stated that notice under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been issued by the Police authorities to some of the relatives and the persons whose names were included by the petitioner in his complaint. It appears that despite the aforesaid prohibitory orders, certain persons resorted in offering namaz at the disputed site. In respect of the aforesaid steps the petitioner has adequate remedies available to him in law, which the petitioner may avail. We thus find no merit in the petition and the petition is summarily dismissed with no orders as to costs. ( A.V. POTDAR, J. ) ( P.V. HARDAS, J.) (vvr/1019.2010criwp)