IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1840 OF 2008. APPLICATION NO.1840 OF 2008. APPLICATION NO.1840 OF 2008. Ashok Krishna Rahate & Ors. ..Applicants. versus Subodh Narhari Pathak & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr.C.K. Pendse with P.B. Patil, for the Applicants. Mr.S.L.Prabhu, for the Respondent Nos.3 and 6. Ms.Padma V. Tatode, for the Respondent No.2. Mr.Subodh N. Pathak, Respondent No.1 in person. Mr.D.P.Adsule, APP, for the Respondent -State. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 22ND AUGUST,2008. : 22ND AUGUST,2008. : 22ND AUGUST,2008. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicants and the learned APP for the State and the learned Counsel appearing for the contesting Respondents. The first prayer in this Application is for quashing various cases filed by the different Complainants. The prayer relates to six cases. Out of six complaints filed against the present Applicants, in case of three complainants, there is only an order passed under section 202 of the Code of Criminal - 2 - Procedure, 1973. In two cases, there is an order under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and in one case, process has been issued. 2. The submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants is that there is a gross abuse of process of law as different complainants have filed separate complaints which are pending in different Courts containing same allegations. The contention is that three or four different Police Stations are investigating the complaints. The other prayer is for transfer of the pending cases and investigation. 3. It is an admitted position that in one case, i.e. case No.250/M/06 (in C.R.No.4/2006), where an order under section 156(3) of the said Code of 1973 was passed, the Investigating Officer has already filed a report seeking ’C’ summary, which is under consideration of the learned Magistrate. It is also an admitted position that in two other cases, bearing Nos.55/I & R/2006 and No.4/I & R/2007 where orders - 3 - under section 202 of the said Code of 1973 were passed, the final reports have been filed, stating therein that no offence has been made out and the said reports are under consideration of the learned Magistrate. In so far as case No.997/SW/2006 is concerned, process has been issued and therefore, remedy of filing a revision application for challenging the order issuing process is available to the Applicants. 4. In case No.100/Misc./2006 (MECR 10/2006), an order was made under section 156(3) of the said Code. In this case, investigation is in progress and the Applicants have been protected by grant of anticipatory bail. The only other case which remains is case no.118/Misc.2003 where an order has been issued under section 202 of the said Code of 1973. In this case, the investigation is in progress and report is awaited. 5. Considering the aforesaid factual aspect, at this stage, no case is made out for exercising power under section 482 of the said Code of 1973. As of - 4 - today, no case is made out for transferring the investigation to one and the same police station. In so far as prayer for transfer of pending cases is concerned, it is for the Applicants to adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with the law at appropriate stage. 6. Subject to what is observed above, the Application is not entertained and the same is rejected. It is made clear that all contentions of the parties on merits of the pending cases are expressly kept open. [ A.S.OKA, J.] A.S.OKA, J.] A.S.OKA, J.]