1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 19 OF 2009 Rashmikant Mansukhlal Shah ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. V.T. Tulpule, Senior Advocate, i/by M/s. Mayur Narendra & Co. for the Petitioner Mr. Shirish Gupte i/by Mr. Prakash Naik for Respondent No. 3 Mr. P.S. Hingorani, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 2009 P.C.:- The complaint has been filed against the petitioner that he has executed some bogus and forged documents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these documents were recovered at the instance of his business rival, and as a matter of fact, the documents are genuine. 2 2. This is a matter which cannot be decided by this Court, but will have to be decided during investigation whether the documents are bogus or genuine. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is already on, and the petitioner has already obtained interim bail. 4. In this view of the matter, we feel that this Court will not be in a position to intervene at this stage of the proceedings. 5. The petitioner further submits that the police officer, who is investigating, may not be unbiased, as he stays in the building which belongs to the complainant. The petitioner may bring this fact to the notice of the Commissioner, who may pass appropriate orders whether the present officer should investigate the matter or some other officer should investigate. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. BILAL NAZKI, J. ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.