- 1 - 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 WRIT PETITION NO.1277 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1277 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1277 OF 2008 Devendra S. Doctor ...Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Devendra S. Doctor, Petitioner in person present. Mr.J.C.Satpute, P.P. for Respondent no.2. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : JULY 23,2008 : JULY 23,2008 : JULY 23,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the Petitioner appearing in person and the learned counsel for the second Respondent. The Petitioner appearing in person filed a complaint before the learned Special Judge alleging commission of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988. On 19th August 2006, the learned Special Judge (C.B.I., Greater Bombay) passed an order under section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 directing that the papers be forwarded to the Incharge D.I.G., C.B.I., Mumbai with a direction to mark it to a competent Officer for inquiry into the matter and with a further direction to submit a report to his Court. The said order was challenged by the second Respondent by filing a Writ Petition in this court. A Division Bench of this court by Judgment and Order dated 3rd September 2007 allowed the petition filed by the second Respondent and the said order dated 19th August 2006 was - 2 - quashed and set aside. 2. Thereafter, a further order was passed on 31st October 2007 by the learned Special Judge holding that the Petitioner appearing in person will have to file a separate appropriate proceeding. The petitioner in person filed Criminal Application No.3772 of 2007 in this Court. By Judgment and Order dated 18th December 2007, this court quashed and set aside the order dated 31st October 2007 passed by the learned Special Judge and directed the learned Special Judge to pass appropriate order in accordance with law on the Misc. Application No.619 of 2005 (complaint) filed by the Petitioner appearing in person. On the basis of the said order, the Petitioner appearing in person moved the learned Special Judge. The learned Special Judge passed an order dated 3rd January 2008 in which he noted that a Special Leave Petition filed by the Petitioner for challenging the Judgment and Order dated 3rd September 2007 passed by the Division Bench of this court is pending before the Apex Court. In view of the pendency of the said petition in the Apex Court, the learned Special Judge observed that it will be appropriate for the Petitioner to wait for the result of the Special Leave Petition which was pending in the Apex Court. In the meanwhile, the learned Judge observed that the Petitioner was at liberty to approach the Central Vigilance Commission. - 3 - 3. In this Petition, the Petitioner appearing in person has made the following prayers : 1) This application to set criminal law into motion as all the remedies has exhausted as per Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 by directing order u/s. 156 (3) against accused Ajaykumar Singh & ors. to C.B.I. (ACB), Mumbai. 2) The investigation u/s. 156 (3) to be completed intime bound i.e. 2 months . Report to be placed before sp-court (ACB under P.C.Act)-Mumbai. 4. I have heard the Petitioner appearing in person. It is an admitted position that the Special Leave Petition filed by the Petitioner has been dismissed by the Apex Court. I find that the complaint/Misc. Application No.619 of 2005 is still pending before the learned Special Judge and the learned Special Judge will have to pass appropriate order thereon in terms of order dated 18th December 2007 passed by this court in Criminal Application No.3772 of 2007. The learned Judge did not pass any appropriate order in view of the pendency of the Special Leave Petition filed by the Petitioner. Now, the Special Leave Petition filed by the Petitioner has been dismissed by the Apex Court. Therefore, now the learned Judge - 4 - will have to pass an appropriate order on the complaint filed by the Petitioner in accordance with law. The only direction which can be issued in this petition is of directing the learned Special Judge to pass an appropriate order. The reliefs which are prayed for in this petition cannot be considered as of today. 5. Hence, the petition is disposed of by passing the following order : i) The learned Special Judge will pass an appropriate order on the complaint (Misc.Application No.619 of 2005) filed by the Petitioner in accordance with directions issued by this Court by order dated 18th December 2007 in Criminal Application No.3772 of 2007. ii) The learned Special Judge will pass an appropriate order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this order. iii) All contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE