1 2853.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2853 OF 2010 Inayat Mukadam ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Shirish Gupte with Mr.Harshad Bhadbhade for Petitioner. Mr.Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with Mr.P.A.Pol, P.P. and Mr.K.V.Saste, A.P.P. for State. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED :- OCTOBER 13, 2010. P.C. 1. The grievance made in this Petition is about the assault on the Petitioner at the residence and office of Mr.Bhaskar Jadhav. The grievance is that inspite of grievous injuries caused to the Petitioner, the local Police Officer registered offence only under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and later on added Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the Petitioner, since the incident in question had occurred at the office and residence of Bhaskar Jadhav, he 2 2853.10.sxw ought to have been named as accused in the F.I.R. as registered by the local Police which, however, is conveniently not done. 2. In response to this Petition, the Advocate General appears for the State and submits that without prejudice to the plea available to the Respondents about the maintainability of this Petition and without accepting the allegations in the Petition as made, to observe fairness and instill confidence in the investigating machinery, considering the fact that the allegations are made against the Investigating Officer as also high dignitary who incidentally happens to be Minister in the present dispensation, it may be appropriate that investigation is taken over by the I.G., Konkan Range. He may supervise the investigation to be made by any superior Officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. We say so because the allegation in the Petition appears to be that Mr.Jagdish Kakade, Inspector of Police, Chiplun Police Station and Dy.S.P. Mr.Chandrahas Chavan were present when the incident occurred. 3 2853.10.sxw 3. In view of the above, no further directions may be necessary in the present Petition. The Petition is disposed of on the above terms. 4. Needless to observe that if the Petitioner has any other grievance regarding the investigation or the follow up action taken by the Authorities, would be free to take recourse to such other remedy as may be permissible by law. All questions in that behalf are left open. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)