Citizen Action Group (Cag) Through Its President Ashok Asthana v. The Principal Secretary And ORS

18crpilst5.doc ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION ST. NO.5 OF 2018 Citizen Action Group (CAG)

...Petitioner

vs.

The Principal Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

Mr.Ahmed Abdi i/b Satyaprakash Sharma for the petitioner Ms P.P.Shinde, APP for State CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SURENDRA P.TAVADE, JJ.

Digitally signed by ShubhaS.

Pathak Date:

2020.02.03 11:58:26 +0530 ShubhaS.

Pathak DATE : JANUARY 31, 2020.

P. C. :

.

Heard Shri Abdi learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP Ms Shinde for State. PIL is filed for following relief : prayer a "(a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.4 to file criminal proceedings and register FIR on Nitesh Thakur and take appropriate criminal action and also to take appropriate steps as per law to bring back to Shri Nitesh J. Thakur, who is absconding since long."

The learned APP has placed on record a report dated 15.1.2019 by Additional Police Superintendent, Anti Corruption Bureau, s 1/2

18crpilst5.doc Thane Zone, Thane. The report shows that initially FIR No.7 of 2012 was registered against the said Nitish Thakur in Alibaug for the offence under sections 13(1)(B) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 and section 109 of IPC and section 3 of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act,1988. The report further shows that investigation of this case was transferred to Enforcement Directorate. Bail application preferred by the said Nitish was also rejected and thereafter said Nitish was absconding. However, he was arrested by Enforcement Directorate on 21st January 2018 from Dubai. Even the property of the accused worth of Rs.133 crores approximately is already attached. The report dated 15th January 2019 is taken on record.

In the light of the said report, learned counsel for the applicant fairly submits that the grievance made in the petition does not survive and the PIL deserves to be disposed of. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. [SURENDRA P.TAVADE, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] s 2/2