1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 310 OF 2009 Mr. Mahesh Mohanbhai Patel. ... Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents. Ms. Shakuntala Wadekar for the Petitioner. Mrs. A. S. Pai, APP for the State. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and A. R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 3RD MARCH, 2009. P.C.: By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks direction from this Court that respondent No.2 who has seized the vehicle should release the vehicle. On instructions, the learned Public Prosecutor submits that while this vehicle was being presented for the purpose of change of registration in another name, it was found that Chasis number of the vehicle in question was also the Chasis number of another vehicle which was already registered. Thereafter, after making enquiries they found that the vehicle of the petitioner was a fake one, whereas the other one was the genuine vehicle sold by the company. It is not possible for us at this stage to come 2 to the conclusion as to which of the vehicle was fake and which was not fake. 2. Certainly, one of the vehicles was fake and therefore, we cannot allow the petitioner's prayer that the vehicle be released. Since there are two vehicles with same Chasis number, therefore, the matter ought to have been referred to the Police for proper investigation. Since two vehicles were found with one Chasis number, there is also a possibility that many such vehicles may be running. 3. Therefore, we dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents to file report before the concerned police station so that the matter can be investigated. 4. We make it clear that we have not decided anything about the genuineness of either of the vehicle nor have we decided any rights of the petitioner. 5. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (A. R. JOSHI, J.)