1 wp3571.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 3571 of 2010 Dr. Vijay Prakash Pandey ..Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ..Respondents Mr. O.P. Pandey i/b. Pandey & co. with Ms. Neeta Gaikwad for the petitioner. Mr. K.V. Saste – APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ DATED :- DECEMBER 23, 2010. P.C. We are in agreement with the preliminary objection taken by the Learned APP that the relief as claimed is in the nature of directing police officers not to act in accordance with law. Such prohibitory order cannot be granted nor can be countenanced. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the police is acting under 2 wp3571.10.sxw dictation on the basis of instructions issued by the Home Ministry and are in process of registering offence against the Petitioner in relation to the matters referred to in the Demand Notice sent to the Petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Copy of the complaint is not produced by the Petitioner. The grievance of the Petitioner is on the basis of assumption and not founded on facts. If the complaint pertains to the said issue which is already subject matter of notice received by the Petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, it will be open to the Petitioner to challenge the FIR, if registered. That challenge can be considered on its own merits. But the general and blanket relief which is claimed by the Petitioner in the present Petition cannot be countenanced. 3. The Petition is, therefore, dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to pursue other remedies as may be available. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)