: 1 : appw.460.2011 vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.460 OF 2011 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.626 OF 2011 Prabhakar Limbaji Bade .. Applicant V/s. Chanda Ajay Nathani .. Respondent Mr.Satyajit Dighe for the Applicant Mr.P.A. Pol, P.P. for the Respondent CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATED: OCTOBER 12, 2011 P.C.: 1. Writ petition No.6226 of 2011 was heard and decided by us on 14.7.2011. 2. This application has been filed by Respondent No.1 in the said petition to recall the said order. As Respondent No.1 party in person did not appear after the learned advocate engaged by him had withdrawn, a fresh notice was issued to him and he was duly served. It is under these circumstances that the Petition came to be decided on 14.7.2011 when Respondent No.1 did not appear before us. : 2 : appw.460.2011 3. The petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No.626 of 2011 is a judicial officer and Respondent No.3 had passed an order on 22.12.2010 directing investigation u/s 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code into the complaint filed against the Petitioner and pursuant to the said order, C.R. No.8 of 2011 came to be registered on 14.2.2011 with the Vadavani police station. In our order dated 14.7.2011, we referred to the following directions of the Supreme Court in the case of U.P. Judicial Officers' Association vs. Union of India & Ors., (1994) 4 SCC 687 and noted that in view of the said directions, Respondent No.3 could not have passed the order directing investigation u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner, “as the aforesaid guidelines were in regard to all offences generally; but when any criminal conduct is attributed to a Judicial Officer in discharge of his duties or in purported exercise or discharge of his duties, we direct that, in addition, no crime for investigation should be registered pursuant to any FIR without the permission of the Chief Justice of the High Court”. 4. We had, therefore, allowed the petition and C.R. No.8 of 2011 registered with the Vadavani police station was quashed and set aside. : 3 : appw.460.2011 5. The said order does not call for any reconsideration and hence this application is rejected. 6. Let this order be intimated to the applicant at his present postal address forthwith by the Registry. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.)