1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 394 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2516 OF 2009 Manohar Teoomal Joukani & Ors. ... Applicants. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. N. Thakkar with Rajesh Sharma for the Applicants. Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani with Ms. Edith Dey for Intervenor. Ms. A.T. Jhaveri, APP for the State. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 02nd FEBRUARY 2010. P.C. :- This application seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against the Investigating Officer, who, it is alleged, proceeded to open a bank locker despite an ad-interim order of this Court dated 23rd July 2009 prohibiting and restraining the prosecution from taking further steps after registration of the subject FIR. 2. In the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the Investigating Officer, he has tendered an un-conditional apology and has clarified that the order came to his notice on 25th July 2009 in the circumstances narrated by him in his affidavit in reply. 2 3. After the matter was argued for some time, although, I am of the opinion that the I.O. was aware of the order, yet, in the peculiar facts of this case, on account of some communication gap and procedural formalities in the concerned Police Station, a drastic action is not taken against the I.O. However, it is directed that hereafter, if orders are passed in the presence of the Public Prosecutor or the Additional Public Prosecutor, it is their duty to communicate the said orders to the concerned Police Station/I.O. The Court will not countenance and accept a defence that the I.O. is personally not aware of the order when the orders are passed in the presence of the P.P. In the peculiar facts of this case, I am of the view that nothing further needs to be done. The application is disposed off. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)