Satishchandra Kishan Goyal And ORS v. The State Of Maharastra And ANR

3224-12-wp=.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3224 OF 2013 Satishchandra Kishan Goyal and Ors.

.. Petitioners v/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..Respondents Ms. Sneha Pingle i/b Vijay Shinde for the petitioners Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the respondent State CORAM: RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.

DATED: 18th APRIL, 2015.

P.C.

1.

Heard. By this petition, the petitioners are seeking following reliefs :

"(A) That the respondent no.1, their officers are directed that property seized by the respondent no.1 be directed to give records of the property of respondent no.2 and permanently restrained respondent no.2 by an order not to create third party right of said property.

(B) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition, the respondent no.1, their officers be directed that Uday S. Jagtap

3224-12-wp=.doc property seized by th respondent kept in custody of respondent no.1 or court receiver.

(C) That direction may be given not to give custody of movable and immovable property by the JMFC Court to the respondent no.2.

(D) That direction may be given to respondent no.1 that the names of the above all complainants those are not added may be added into the FIR in the Vashi Police Station bearing FIR No.294/2012."

2.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner, out of above prayers, press relief prayed in prayer clauses (d). In our opinion, this relief cannot be granted. There cannot be more than one informant or more than one FIR in one Crime. The statement of the aggrieved person can be recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.

3.

The Petition is without any merit and the same is dismissed accordingly.

(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) ( RANJIT MORE, J.) Uday S. Jagtap