JUDGMENT A. B. CHAUDHARI, .J. :- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The grievance made by the petitioner is that in fact, Kavita w/o Madhukar Nannavarc, daughter of the petitioner, was murdered and, therefore, criminal investigation for murder was required to be made by police authorities which they have failed to by giving a reason that case is one of suicide. 3. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court in the petition and investigation made by the Investigating Officer, affidavits dated 06.11.2006 by Hanumansingh Bahadursingh Rajput, A.P.L, Police Station Bhisi, Dist. Chandrapur was filed. We find from para 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the affidavit that sufficient investigation was made with which they are satisfied to find out whether death was homicidal or suicidal and conclusion has been drawn that the death was suicidal. Paras 3 to 6 read thus: "3. It is submitted that as per the post mortem report the cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging. The finding given in Column No.17 in the Post Mortem Report was clear that ligature mark 2 Cm. Broad, "V" shape placed on front and lateral side of neck clearly established the case of hanging. The Investigating Agency also made query by issuing a letter to the Medical Officer dt. 3.7.2006. Accordingly, on 3.7.2006 the Medical Officer, Rural Hospital, Chimur made it clear that the death of the deceased was due to hanging. 4. During the course of inquiry of accident death the Police have recorded the statement of mother of the deceased namely Meerabai Jambhule, resident of Dong aria, Ta. Chimur, Dist. Chandrapur, on 7.6.2006. So also the statement of cousin of deceased namely Narayan Jambhule also recorded on 9.7.2006. The statement of one MaIa Rajendra Nagpure, resident of Kanpa are recorded on 12.7.2006 and the real sister namely Gumpha Ashok Magare, resident of Bhankheda recorded on 4.1 1.2006. It reveals from the statement of these witnesses that the mental condition of the deceased Kavita alias Kumud was not good. Some time she was behaving like a mad person. 5. It is submitted that none of the witnesses have stated at the relevant time that there was any suspicion against the death of deceased Kumud. They have not suspected any of the in-laws of deceased Kumud, neither they have stated that the death of Kumud is homicidal. Some time she was behaving like a mad person. 5. It is submitted that none of the witnesses have stated at the relevant time that there was any suspicion against the death of deceased Kumud. They have not suspected any of the in-laws of deceased Kumud, neither they have stated that the death of Kumud is homicidal. During the course of inquiry the Police also recorded the statement of the persons from matrimonial house of the deceased as well as neighbourer, but none of the witness stated against any person pertaining to homicidal death. 6. Even otherwise also the report dt.9.6.2006 which came to be filed by the petitioner on 11.6.2006 does not disclose any harassment or atrocities made by the alleged non-applicant/ in-laws against the deceased Kavita alias Kumud." 4. We also find from para 8 of the affidavit that the Sub Divisional Police Officer has supervised the investigation also by visiting the spot. Para 8 reads thus: "8. It would not be out of place to mention here that the Sub-Divisional Police Officer himself visited the scene of offence and verified the statements and medical evidence into the matter and after getting him satisfied with the initial inquiry kept the matter under inquiry. The viscera was sent to the chemical analyzer. The report from chemical analyzer is awaited." 5. Criminal investigation machinery has done enough to find out the truth. At any rate, time gap that has occurred from the date of filing of the petition or the incident till this date, to our mind would be relevant to refuse to order investigating machinery to make further investigation. Hence, we pass the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Writ Petition No. 433/2006 is disposed of with no orders. (ii) Rule discharged. Ordered accordingly.