1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.23 OF 2009 Mrs.Asha Anil Gachke Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and others Respondents Abhijeet N. Gosavi for petitioner. Miss S.V.Gajre, APP for the State. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 29th June 2009 PC :- 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner filed a complaint before the learned Magistrate alleging commission of offences against the accused under sections 380, 418, 420, 451, 504, 506, 506(ii), 210, 34, 120-B of Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate did not grant prayer made by the petitioner for an action under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and directed that the petitioner to appear for recording of his verification statement. A revision application was preferred by the petitioner against the said order which was rejected. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that 2 the Courts below have completely ignored that at least for the offence alleged under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, investigation by the Police was necessary and this aspect has not been considered. 3. The complaint filed by the petitioner has not been dismissed but the applicant has been directed to appear for recording of verification statement. Considering the fact that possession was taken over in execution of a decree passed by the Court of Small Causes, the learned Magistrate has declined to grant the discretionary relief under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. There is no reason to interfere with the discretionary order of the Magistrate. The petition is rejected. However, all the contentions of the petitioner on merits of the complaint are expressly kept open. (A.S.OKA, J.)