ORDER :

Leave granted.

2. These Two Appeals have been filed against the common impugned judgment of the High Court of Bombay dated September 08, 2009.

3. The facts in detail have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here.

4. By the impugned order, the Bombay High Court has, in paragraph 9 of its order, changed the Investigating Officer and appointed a Special Investigating Officer to investigate into the alleged offence.

5. This Court has held in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & Others, reported in AIR 2008 SC 907, that if a person has a grievance that his F.I.R. has not been registered by the police, or having been registered, proper investigation is not being done, then the remedy of the aggrieved person is not to go to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but to approach the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. If such an application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. is made and the Magistrate is, prima facie, satisfied, he can direct the F.I.R. to be registered, or if it has already been registered, he can direct proper investigation to be done which includes in his discretion, if he deems it necessary, recom