1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.295 OF 2010 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.296 OF 2010 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.297 OF 2010 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.298 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr.A.M.Saraogi for the petitioner. Mrs.S.D.Shinde APP in WP Nos.295/10 and 298/10. Mr.Y.M.Nakhawa APP for the State in WP No. 296/10. Mr.S.N.Gawade APP for the State in WP No. 297/10. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 31/03/2010 PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In these four petitions, the petitioners have made the following prayer: “(a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass an appropriate writ, order and direction directing the Registrar of this Hon’ble Court to hold necessary enquiry and investigation in respect of issuance of bailable S 2 warrant against the Petitioner in a disposed of case and more particularly, Case No.24/SW/2006 by the Hon’ble Metropolitan Magistrates 37th Court at Esplanade, Mumbai and subject to outcome of such enquiry, be pleased to take necessary action as per the provisions of law against all such responsible persons.” 3. There is no dispute that after bailable warrant was issued, the petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate and got the bailable warrant cancelled. We have perused the roznama so also the order dated 10.3.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge allowing criminal revision application No.1226 of 2006. By the said order the revision applications filed by the petitioner was allowed and the process issued against him was set aside and the matter was remanded to the learned Magistrate for its disposal in accordance with law. After remand, it appears that the petitioner did not appear before the court and in view thereof the 3 bailable warrant was issued. When we asked Mr.Saraogi, learned counsel for the petitioner whether he has any grievance against the learned Magistrate or staff of the court, he answered in the negative. In view thereof and having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case the prayers made in the writ petitions cannot be entertained. Hence all the writ petitions are dismissed. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)