1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3958 OF 2009 Bhushan Prakash Londhe........ Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. H.E. Palwe adv. for the Applicant Mr. H.J. Dedhia APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 11th September,2009. P. C.: 1. This is a second application seeking anticipatory bail. The first application was rejected on 28 th July 2009 after considering the merit of the matter. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, a relevant fact was not brought to the notice of the court and was not considered and the said fact relates to the earlier crimes registered against the present applicant. Order dated 28 th July 2009 observes that some crimes are already registered against the applicant from the year 2006 onwards. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the court needs to take into consideration the fact that while committing some of the offences, the applicant was minor. Reliance has been placed on a full bench judgment of the Rajasthan High Court, reported in 2005 Cr.L.J. 2 2086, which lays down that a second or subsequent bail application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be filed, if there is a change in the fact situation, or in law which requires the earlier view being interfered with or where the earlier finding has become obsolete. It is also held that this is a limited area wherein the jurisdiction under 438 Cr.P.C. can be exercised, even when a second application is filed. In my view there is absolutely no change in the fact situation in the present application after rejection of the first application. This application is thus wholly mis-conceived and hence rejected for the reasons recorded in the order dated 28 th July 2009. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)