/ 1 / IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.653 OF 2008 Shri. Avinash Arora & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri.Shirish Gupte Sr.Counsel i/b. Rucheta Dhuru for Applicants. Shri.S.S. Pednekar APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : 31st MARCH, 2008. P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants and learned APP for the State. 2. Shri.Gupte learned Senior Counsel for the Applicants submitted that Sessions Court rejected application for anticipatory bail on the ground that applicants could not remain present when they were directed by the Sessions Court to remain present. He submitted that the Applicants could not comply with the order passed by the Sessions / 2 / Court on account of unavoidable circumstances. He submitted that while they were coming to Bombay from Chandigarh their car met with an accident and they were admitted in the hospital, as a result of which they could not remain present. This Court had directed the learned APP for the State to verify with the office of the DIG whether the statement made by the Applicants was correct or not. Learned APP for the State submitted that DIG has verified and has come to the conclusion that the Applicants were unable to attend the Court since their car had met with an accident and they were hospitalized. 3. I am satisfied that the Applicants were unable to attend the Sessions Court and sufficient cause has been shown for their absence. Since the Sessions Court has rejected their application merely on the the ground that they did not remain present, ends of justice would be met if the impugned order passed by the Sessions Court is set aside and the application which was filed by the Applicants is heard by the Sessions Court on merits. Needless to state that till the next date before the Sessions Court, the Applicants shall not be arrested in connection / 3 / with offence which is registered against them vide C.R.No.77/04 for the offences punishable U/s.403, 406, 418, 420, 424 r/w 34 of IPC. Sessions Court shall, thereafter, after hearing the learned counsel for the Applicants, consider whether interim order should be continued or not. Sessions Court shall hear the Application for anticipatory bail as expeditiously as possible. Applicants shall remain present before the Sessions Court on 9th April, 2008. Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order. Application is disposed of accordingly. V.M. KANADE J.