1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.412 OF 2009 EDM Technologies (India) Pvt.Ltd. ..Petitioners. v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents. Mr.Shirish Gupte, Sr. Counsel i/b. S.R.Mithare for Petitioners. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP for State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED :- NOVEMBER 10, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard counsel for the parties. This Petition takes exception to the concurrent view taken by two Courts below in not framing charge against the Respondent No.2. The reason recorded by the Trial Court is that the Complainant has failed to examine any witness to prima facie establish ingredient of section 465 of I.P.Code. Moreover, even the Complainant’s witness P.W.1 has nowhere deposed that the accused prepared the false document with dishonest intention to cause any person to part with property, which is the allegation made in the complaint. It is noticed that the Complainant in para-6 has alleged that the document was prepared by 2 the accused with an idea of extracting money from Shri J.B.Patil. In other words, it was done with dishonest intention. However, when evidence is recorded of the Complainant, this aspect has not been deposed to at all. In absence of tittle of evidence with regard to the ingredient of dishonest intention, question of framing charge under section 465 of I.P.Code does not arise. Hence, no merit. Petition is dismissed. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)