1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.612 OF 2010 Mahendra Tulsidas Bhuta. ....Petitioner Vs. Senior Inspector of Police, Nirmal Nagar Police Station & ors. ....Respondents Mr.R.Satyanarayanan, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.P.Adsule, APP for State. CORAM:­ A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATED:­ SEPTEMBER 28, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner and learned APP. Perused the documents pressed into service on behalf of the Petitioner as well as the reply affidavit filed by the Respondents. 2. We are in agreement with the argument of the Respondents that the allegations made in the written complaint dated 16th June, 2008 is after thought. Besides, no one has come forward to support the said allegation to the effect that the two brothers shouted at the complainant and subsequently, the friends accompanying the said two brothers threatened the complainant to kill. No such 2 disclosure was made when the complaint was recorded with the concerned Police Station on 10th June, 2008 and again on 13th June, 2008. It is not the case of the Petitioner that although such statement was made before the Police, the same was not intentionally recorded by the police so as to treat the complaint only as N.C. We do not find any averments in the Writ Petition that such statement was made in the police station at the relevant time. In other words, the written complaint, as filed is afterthought and perhaps under legal advice. The said complaint does not disclose name of any person having witnessed the incident of threatening the complainant. Moreover, the incident pertains to June, 2008. At this distance of time, no fruitful purpose will be served by directing the police to pursue the matter further. Indeed, it will be open to the Petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy, as may be permissible by law. In the circumstances, this Petition deserves to be dismissed. Hence, rejected. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)