1 wp1031.10 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1031 OF 2010 Shri Subhash Bhimrao Gavsane. ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Respondents Mr. Dilip Bodke, advocate for petitioner. Dr. F.R.Shaikh, APP for State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATED:- OCTOBER 21, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. The relief claimed in this Petition is essentially to quash the enquiry report of the J.M.F.C. Madha, District Solapur and to direct the J.M.F.C. to take action against the police officers and others who have ill-treated the Petitioner on 26th January, 2009 while in police custody. The report of the J.M.F.C. finds that there is no substance in the complaint made by the Petitioner. 2. Counsel for the Petitioner however, has invited our attention to the medical certificate at page-32, which mentions two injuries noticed by the 2 wp1031.10 doctor on the Petitioner before he was taken in police custody. Reliance is also placed on the second report issued by the same medical officer dated 27th January, 2009, which however, mentions three additional injuries such as contusions and small ulcer. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the J.M.F.C. has overlooked this crucial aspect of the matter. There is no explanation on record as to how these three new injuries were found on the person of the Petitioner while he was in police custody . It is on this basis it is submitted that in fact the second medical report reinforces the allegation of the Petitioner that he was brutally assaulted while in police custody. Even if, we were to entertain the grievance of this Petitioner, in our opinion, this matter will have to be tried before the appropriate court. The Petitioner would be free to file complaint, which will have to be decided on its own merits in accordance with law uninfluenced by the opinion of the J.M.F.C. 3. The Petitioner apprehends that the private complaint will proceed before the same J.M.F.C.. Insofar as this apprehension is concerned, it will be open to the Petitioner to apply for transfer of trial before some other J.M.F.C. which application be considered appropriately. In view of the above, no further direction is required in the Petition. 3 wp1031.10 4. Petition disposed of on the above terms with liberty to the Petitioner to pursue such other remedy, as may be permissible in law. All questions are left open. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)