1 wp1226.06.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 1226 of 2006 Dr. P.J. Nayak & ors. ..Petitioners v/s. Sunil Chandik Patil (deceased)& anr. ..Respondents Mr. Girish Kulkarni for the petitioners. Mr. Vikas Mali for respondent no.1. Mr. D.P. Adsule-APP for the state. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D. KODE, JJ 18th August, 2011. P.C. None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called out. Hence, dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. Later on Mr. Girish Kulkarni for the petitioners mentioned the matter requesting to recall the order dismissing the petition for non-prosecution v on the ground that when the matter was called out, he was busy in some other Court. For the reason mentioned, order dismissing the petition for non-prosecution is recalled. Petition is restored to file to its original number. 2 wp1226.06.sxw 3. This petition is for quashing the Criminal Case No. 81/2006. The respondent no.1 filed private complaint for offence under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420 read with 34 of IPC. In terms of order passed by the Criminal Court under Section 156(3) the matter was required to be investigated by Palus police station. It is not in dispute that the said investigation has been proceeded by Palus police station. It is also noticed that the original Complainant Sunil Patil has expired long back. That fact was notified to the Advocate for the petitioner in the year 2009. No corrective measures have been taken by the petitioners to bring on record the partner of original Complainant who has now substituted himself as a Complainant before the criminal Court. Be that as it may, since the investigation has proceeded, that matter will have to be taken to its logical end by permitting the concerned Investigating Officer to present the police report before the concerned Court. After the Investigating Officer presents the police report upon conclusion of the investigation, the concerned Court may have to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. The petitioners apprehend that their names will be mentioned in the proposed police report as accused. This apprehension is pre-mature. It is only if the police report is adverse against the petitioners or any one or more than one of them as the case may, the concerned petitioner would be free to take out appropriate proceedings before the Criminal Court or any other remedy as may be permissible by law. 4. Suffice it to observe that this petition will have to be disposed of leaving all questions open and with liberty to the petitioner to pursue such other remedy as may be available, if and when required. Till the police report is presented before the concerned Court, the interim relief granted in 3 wp1226.06.sxw favour of the petitioner in terms of order dated 3rd October, 2006 shall continue. The same shall continue for a further period of two weeks from the date of presentation of the police report in the concerned Court to enable the concerned petitioner who has been named as accused in the said police report to take recourse to suitable remedy as may be advised in accordance with law including to apply for grant of anticipatory bail or regular bail, as the case may be. 5. Petition disposed of in the above terms. (P.D. KODE, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)