spb/- 1 wp949-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 949 OF 2011 Mr. Shivprakash Ramnayan Tiwari ... Petitioner. V/s. State of Maharashtra ... Respondent. --- Mr. R.K. Agarwal for the Petitioner. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State. ----- CORAM : P. V. HARDAS & M.N.GILANI,JJ. DATE : 29TH APRIL, 2011. P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset states that the petitioner does not press for the relief of transfer of investigation at prayer clause (b) to the petition. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed in respect of prayer clause (b) as not pressed. 2 By virtue of prayer clause (a) to the petition the petitioner has prayed for addition of two persons, who are named by the petitioner in the first information report as accused in the said crime. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed for addition of sections 307, 326, 448, 354, 148 read with section 34 of the IPC. It appears that on the basis of the report, initially an offence punishable under sections 324, 325, 323, 504, 506 read with section 34 came to be registered against the petitioner. Since the petitioner apprehended that the serious offence of section 307 had not been added to the offences which were registered, the petitioner has filed the present petition. The learned APP states on instruction that the spb/- 2 wp949-11.sxw investigation has been completed and the chargesheet has been forwarded to the superiors before the same would be submitted in the court of law. He further states on instruction that now the investigating officer has added sections 326, 354, 141, 143, 148 and 148 to the offices which have been already registered. It is stated before us that since the ingredients of section 307 have not been made out, section 307 has not been added. 3 The learned counsel for the petitioner make an endavour to point out to us that the basic ingredients of section 307 have been made out and consequently, the police ought to have registered offence under section 307 of the IPC. According to us since the investigation is completed and the investigating officer intends to submit chargesheet before the court of competent jurisdiction shortly, we are not inclined to intervene in the petition at this stage. It would always be open to the petitioner to point out to the learned court before whom the matter would be placed for framing of charge that an offence under section 307 is made out and not an offence punishable under section 326. If the court is accordingly satisfied that the offence under section 307 is made out the court would be taking further action as per law. In these circumstances, therefore, according to us interest of the petitioner have been adequately protected. In that light of the matter, since the relief which the petitioner has prayed for stands granted to him, we are not inclined to interfere in the present petition. 4 The petition is, therefore, accordingly dismissed with the aforesaid observations. [M.N.GILANI,J.] [P.V. HARDAS, J.]