← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4380/2014others disposed off

Ramila Rajnikant Kilachand And ANR. v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

2015-08-03Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Anuja Prabhudessai,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ranjit More.2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4380 OF 2014 Mrs. Ramila R. Kilachand & Another.

..Petitioners.

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Others.

..Respondents.

Mr. R. V. Bansode for the Petitioners.

Mr. J. P. Yagnik, learned APP for the State.

Mr. H. C. Pimple for Respondent No. 3.

Mrs. U. V. Kejriwal for Union of India.

Mr. C. N. Atule, Police Inspector of V. P. Road Police Station. Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.

Date : August 3, 2015.

P. C. :

1.

Petition is filed for a direction to Respondents to register an FIR on the basis of Petitioner's statement dated 23rd March 2013.

2.

Mr. Yagnik, learned APP for the State, having taken instructions from the officer concerned, makes a statement that on 24th July 2013 at the instance of Rationing Officer, CR. No.172 of 2013 was registered against the alleged tenants for the offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Charge-sheet is also filed. Mr. Yagnik patilsr 1 / 2

also submitted that that in the Statement dated 23rd March 2013, the Petitioner has made a grievance that on the basis of bogus ration cards, additional FSI was obtained and thereafter Government was defrauded to the tune of Rs.500 crores. Mr. Yagnik further submitted that allegations made in the present complaint and in the said CR/FIR are one and the same and arises from the same transaction. He submitted that allegations made by the Petitioner in the present Statement are being looked into by the EOW and further enquiry is on and appropriate decision would be taken shortly, which would be communicated to the Petitioner. Statement is accepted. Let this exercise be completed within the period of four weeks from today.

3.

In view of the above, grievance of the Petitioner no more survives. Hence, writ petition is disposed of. 4.

In view of the disposal of main petition, application if any taken out in this petition, does not survive and the same accordingly stands disposed of.

[SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] patilsr 2 / 2