IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.381 OF 2005 Shantaram Raghu Padwal ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ...... Mr.Uday P.Warunjikar for Applicant. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P. for Respondent. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. FEBRUARY 7, 2005. FEBRUARY 7, 2005. FEBRUARY 7, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 2. I see no reason to depart from the conclusion reached by the Trial Court in rejecting the Bail Application preferred by the Applicant, having regard to overwhelming evidence on record indicating specific role of the Applicant. Even the post-mortem report gives graphic position about the nature of assault on the deceased. Not a case : 2 : for bail. Rejected. 3. The District Judge, Pune, is directed to assign the case to the Fast Track Court, if already not done, so as to ensure early disposal of the case. 4. If the Trial Court is of the opinion that the Applicant is responsible for the delay of the trial, that fact be recorded in the Roznama, which will be considered as and when occasion arises. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.