JUDGMENT

M.S.SONAK,J.

1. Heard Mr. Amit S. Kinkhede, learned counsel for the applicant, and Mr. S.S. Doifode, Additional Public Prosecutor for Nonapplicant Nos.1 and 2, and Mr. Pankaj v. Navlani, Advocate for Nonapplicant No.3.

2. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith at the request of and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

3. By this application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant invokes the inherent powers of this Court and seeks to quash of First Information Report No.3468/2011, dated 26.5.2011 and the consequent charge-sheet No.770/2011 dated 3.10.2011.

4. The allegation in the impugned F.I.R. and the charge-sheet is that the applicant has committed offenses punishable under Sections 66A and 66C of the Information and Technology Act, 2000 (in short, "I.T. Act ").

5. Mr. S.S. Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant Nos.1 and 2 and Shri Pankaj Navlani, learned counsel for non-applicant No.3 submit that the present application may not be entertained because the applicant has already applied for discharge before the competent Court where the impugned charge-sheet has been filed.

6. According to us, this obje