1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2390 OF 2007 Bharat T. Vora. .. .. .. Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.. .. .. Respondents. Mr. J.S. Chaurasia i/by M/s. Ashoka Law for the Petitioner. Ms. P. H. Kantharia, APP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM: BILAL NAZKI and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED : 1ST FEBRUARY, 2008. P. C.: The grievance of the petitioner is that although he made a complaint on 9th May, 2006, the police has not investigated the matter. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Police Sub-Inspector Mr. Dilip G. Deshmukh. He stated that the complaint was filed but no further steps could be taken, in view of the statement of the complainant himself that he had no grievance against the alleged accused. These statements were made by him on 25th August, 2006 and 3rd November, 2006. In view of the statements made by the complainant himself the matter was closed by the police. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there were two allegations against the accused. One was about stealing of car and another was 2 about forging cheque. The petitioner has received car which was recovered by the police and therefore, he had stated that he had no grievance. But the police has not acted with regard to the allegation of forgery. The statement of the petitioner does not qualify the statement that he had no grievance with respect to the theft of car alone and his grievance still remained for forged cheque. However, if the petitioner still has grievance about the alleged forgery, he can still approach the police and if any complaint is filed the police will look into the same in accordance with law. 3. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J.)