1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE - CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2340 OF 2009 Shri Kutekar Francis Joseph Paul .... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Ms Indrayani M. Koparkar for the Petitioner. Ms A.S. Pai, APP, for the State. CORAM: J.N. PATEL & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED: DECEMBER 08, 2009 P.C: 1. Heard. The petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that the police has failed to investigate into the matter because of which the petitioner has suffered and claims that he should be paid exemplary compensation and costs and direction should be issued to handover peaceful possession of the flat and all its contents to him. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that 2 he purchased the flat from Shri Shafiq Ahmed Sheikh and Smt. Mehrunissa S. Sheikh under an Agreement for Sale and Transfer dated 1-8-1994 after paying the consideration amount as recorded in the said Agreement, the copy whereof is annexed to the petition as Exhibit- A. The Secretary of the society, who took charge of the society in May, 2005, broke open the flat and stole the household goods when the petitioner had gone out. On his return, the petitioner found the servants of the Secretary staying in his flat and he was threatened of dire consequences. Though the petitioner tried to lodge a complaint with the Trombay Police Station, the same was not registered and he was informed that a FIR will be registered only after the preliminary inquiry in the matter is completed and though the petitioner repeatedly visited the police station, nothing has been done and, therefore, this Court should issue writ, order or direction to the Crime Branch to conclude the inquiry and handover the peaceful possession of the flat and all its contents to the petitioner. 3. In his affidavit in reply, Shri Vilas Rathod, Police Inspector attached to the Trombay Police Station has stated that on 3 25-9-2006 C.R.No.297 of 2006 was registered at the Trombay Police Station on the complaint of the petitioner against Kamlakant Shah and Mahendra Patil for the offences under Sections 463, 468, 471, 384, 420, 454, 457 and 380 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of the investigation, the police has recorded the statements of various persons and though the petitioner was called upon to produce the registration papers and the other documents relating to the flat in the police station, he has not done so. It is also stated that during the course of the investigation, the original owner of the flat Shafiq Ahmed died and the then investigating officer had visited Village Mandi, Lalgadh, Ajamgadh, Uttar Pradesh to ascertain as to whether there were any relatives of the said deceased but he could not get any information and, therefore, after concluding the investigation, the police has filed "C" Summary before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 45th Court, Kurla, Mumbai. In the counter to the affidavit in reply, the petitioner has not only denied that he had not visited the police station on being called or that he had not produced the original documents of the flat but he has also placed on record the medical certificate of cause of 4 death of Shafiq Ahmed. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the police has not investigated the case properly in order to favour the Secretary of the society. The petitioner has also annexed to the said counter a copy of the alleged lease agreement which is executed by him in favour of one Mahendra G. Patil, who is the alleged Secretary of the society and wherein the Secretary has admitted that the petitioner is the owner of the said flat. Whatever may be the case, as the police has filed a "C" Summary, it will be open for the petitioner to approach the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 45th Court, Kurla, Mumbai and contest the case by filing his objection and placing on record the documents in his possession in support of his contention. 4. On being specifically asked, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no legal proceedings have been initiated on the civil side by the petitioner as he is still hopeful that he will get back his flat by pursuing the writ petition. 5. We, therefore, dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to appear before the concerned Metropolitan 5 Magistrate and contest the police report by filing his objection. The petition accordingly stands disposed. (J.N. PATEL, J.) (A.A. SAYED, J.)