1 25 wp.795.10 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 795 OF 2010 Tapas Sudarshan Bera. ... Petitioner Vs. The Union of India and ors. ... Respondents ----- Mr. Bharat Vaishnawa i/b M/s. Bharat Vaishnawa and Company for the Petitioner. Mr. P.A.Pol, PP for the State. Mr. Rohan P. Surve for Respondent Nos. 8 to 10. ----- CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR and U.D. SALVI, JJ. DATE : 23 rd August, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 The learned APP on instructions states that the local police on inquiry found that the cheques in the aggregate sum of Rs.10 lacs were issued to the Petitioner, which however, were dishonoured. The Petitioner has already instituted criminal action under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in that behalf. Besides, the opinion of the Economic Offence Wing is that it is not a case of cheating as such. In 2 25 wp.795.10 spite of the opinion recored by the police authority, if the Petitioner wants to still pursue criminal action against the Respondents, in particular, Respondent Nos.8 to 10. If so, he is free to do so by taking recourse to remedy of private complaint. All aspects of the matter can be gone into in the said proceedings. We express no opinion in relation to the merits of the allegations to be adjudicated in the said proceedings. 3 Insofar as other reliefs are concerned, direction is sought against Respondent Nos.8 to 10 being private parties. The questions of exercising writ jurisdiction to issue direction to private parties does not arise. In the circumstances, this petition is disposed of with the above said observations. 4 The learned Public Prosecutor assures to handover copy of the report of the Economic Offence Wing to the counsel for the Petitioner. [ U.D. SALVI, J ] [ A.M. KHANWILKAR, J ]