1 CWP-3082.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3082 OF 2010 Sopan Yeshwant Pawar .... Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, .... Respondents Shri G.B. Pawar for the Petitioner. Ms S.D. Shinde, APP, for the State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 08, 2011 P.C: Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. By this petition the petitioner/first informant seeks direction to carry out further investigation and collect evidence. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP. In this case, the police have already filed charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. The learned Judge seized of the matter has also framed the charge of these offences as also under Section 306 of the IPC and some 2 CWP-3082.10 witnesses have already been examined at the trial. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the opinion of the hand-writing expert in relation to the hand-writing on the suicide note should have been obtained by the I.O.. He also stated that the mobile call details of the husband and the brother-in-law of the victim should have been obtained since they could have provided clue as to why the victim committed suicide or was burnt in suspicious circumstances soon after her return from her native place at Bisur, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli to Mumbai. According to the learned counsel, opinion about the abrasive ligature mark found was not taken. He submits that while drawing up the panchnama of the spot, the police should have ascertained as to whether it was possible to lock the main door from outside to make it appear as if it had been locked from inside. He submits that in the nail clipping blood was found but no family member of the accused was medically examined to find out if there were any abrasion. According to him, the record of movements of the accused from his place of employment on the date of the incident was also not obtained. The police had also not collected evidence about the incident at the native place before the party shifted to 3 CWP-3082.10 Mumbai. According to him, the victim s aunt Geeta Shivaji Patil should have examined again since she was residing in the same village. He submits that his client was ready to furnish evidence about the purchase of gold ornaments which the police had not taken from him. 3. The learned APP submitted that all these aspects would be looked into by the I.O. and the I.O. would take appropriate action to submit supplementary report under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. to the concerned Court at the earliest. In view of this, the petition is disposed of. The I.O. to make further investigation in the light of the deficiencies pointed out by the petitioner and submit such charge-sheet as may be necessary. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)