Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1131 (BOM)

Rima Singh @ Rima Shahi v. State of Maharashtra

2011-09-13

K.U.CHANDIWAL

body2011
Judgment : 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. The Petitioner as Complainant in Crime No. 326 of 2000 pending before the learned J.M.F.C. Vashi at Belapur in New Mumbai has requested for further investigation in terms of section 173 (8)of Cr.P.C. It was rejected. Hence, the challenge. 3. The learned counsel submits that the transaction of purchasing plot by the Petitioner with vendors was by parting her consideration. However, behind her back her then husband manipulated with the Vendor and got the conveyance of the property in his name, thereby the Petitioner has been duped and cheated. She says that such exercise was by forging documents and manipulation thereof Learned counsel submits that slackness in investigation in a shabby manner has added fuel to the situation. She has been examined as PW 9 in on going criminal case. 4. Themanner in which the matter is dragged and carried to several Courts illustrates that the parties are more keen in protracting the litigation. The investigation that was carried earlier was so felt not to the satisfaction of the Petitioner which was again question before this Court and Senior Officers were directed to look into the matter. Statement of witnesses were recorded. The Petitioner has confirmed before this Court that she has no grievance of further investigation in the past recorded by the authorities. 5. Considering the volume of the documents, and the stand taken by the Petitioner as Complainant almost all the documents to which she has given reference is before the Court. No further investigation is warranted. The time limit for disposal is also extended. Learned counsel submits that it has been subsequently withdrawn by the Court. May be correct. However, it does not appear that any record is contaminated to the distress of the Petitioner as Complainant though learned counsel has put a blistering attack to the so called shabby investigation. Petition lacks merit. Dismissed. 6. Intervention Application No.351 of 2011 of Rajesh Shahi is also dismissed. Rule discharged.