1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 3652 of 2009 with Criminal Application No. 3676 of 2009 Fida Hussain v. The State of Maharashtra -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr A. Majeed Memon, Advocate and Mr S.I. Jagirdar, Advocate with him for applicant Mr A.S. Fulzele, APP for State. Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 19th January 2010 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State. Criminal Application No. 3676 of 09 is filed for grant of bail in Crime No. 495/06 registered with Police Station, Gadge Nagar, Amravati for offences under Sections 166, 167, 201, 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477 (A) read with Sections 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 13 (i) (d) (i) (ii) (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Criminal Application no. 3652 of 2009 is filed for grant of bail in crime No. 262/09 registered with Police Station, City Kotwali, Amravati for offences under similar sections as referred to above. 2. Earlier, the applicant had moved applications for 2 grant of bail in the aforesaid two crime numbers and the applications were rejected by common order dated 9th October 2009 in Criminal Application No. 3271 of 09 and Criminal Application No. 3272 of 2009. It was observed in the common order that unless main prosecution witnesses are examined in the trial, benefit of bail cannot be extended to the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the trial is not likely to commence in near future on account of the fact that sanctions as against Government servants who were made accused, are yet to be obtained and it would require quite some time. In this regard, it is made clear that it would be for the trial Court to consider and apply its mind, in the facts and circumstances of the case, as to whether statutory sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. is really required or not. Legal position is well-settled in this behalf by various judgments of the Apex Court. Learned Special Court has observed in its order dated 3.12.2009 that obviously some reasonable time will be required to proceed with the trial pending receipt of sanction orders. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has also directed the prosecution to produce sanction orders under Section 197 Cr.P.C. as early as possible. Hence, prayer seeking bail on the ground that much time would be required to obtain sanctions, is rejected. 4. It is next contended that father of the applicant is a heart patient and there is nobody to look after him. Medical Certificate dated 9.1.2010 issued by one Dr Abbas S. 3 Chopdawala, Consultant Physician, Pune is placed on record to show that father of applicant has undergone angiography and that he is required to undergo angioplasty. 5. As against this, learned APP submits that applicant has two brothers by name Nuruddin and Murtaza who are capable of taking care of father of applicant and presence of applicant is not necessary. It is brought to my notice that brother Murtaza has not surrendered though his anticipatory bail application was rejected. 6. Considering the submissions at bar, liberty is granted to the applicant to move afresh before the trial Court raising ground of probable delay in procuring sanction orders under Section 197 Cr.P.C. and thereby affecting disposal of trial within a reasonable period. In the event application on such ground is made, trial Court shall take into account settled legal position as to whether sanction is really necessary or not and if yes, whether it would take unreasonable and inordinate delay to have receipt of sanction orders, holding up early disposal of trial and decidee application strictly on merits without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court. In the alternative, in view of the ailments of father of applicant, if presence of the applicant is really needed to attend to his father, it will be open for the applicant to substantiate the same before the trial Court by making application for grant of temporary bail. If such an application for temporary bail is moved, learned trial Court shall consider the same by prima facie examining the medical papers 4 and need of the applicant to attend to his father. Applications stand disposed of accordingly. Hamdast granted. Judge. Hsj