1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1339 /2010 (Shahid Jamshed Sharief and another vs. State of Maharashtra) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr Kale, Adv.for applicants Mr. J B Jaiswal, APP for Respondent CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 6 th September, 2010. Heard. 2. The applicant was granted benefit of interim anticipatory bail until reply is filed in connection with accusations made under section 307, 397 read with section 34 IPC reported as Crime No.126/2010 at Tahsil Police Station Nagpur. Although interim anticipatory bail was limited until reply is filed and reply too is filed, learned Advocate Mr SS Jasiwal for the applicant remained absent. 3. Today Shri Kale, learned Advocate prayed for adjournment. No adjournment can be granted since the interim anticipatory order was already vacated on 2.9.2010 when prayer was made on the ground that the clients are desirous of engaging a senior counsel to argue the application. Considering the nature of accusation u/s 307, 397 r/ws. 34 IPC, the learned APP has objected the application on the ground that the investigation is underway and custodial interrogation 2 of the applicant is necessary to collect the material such as discovery /recovery of weapon etc. For the smooth sailing of investigation, anticipatory bail is objected. It is also contended that statement of the injured in this case was recorded in the hospital as dying declaration by the Executive Magistrate and weapon of offence is yet to be recovered as also the huge stolen amount to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs. Considering these objections, there is no question of granting anticipatory bail in respect of such a serious accusations. Application is rejected. JUDGE Sahare