1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 154 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 638 OF 2005 Somnath Gangaram Shinde .. Petitioner. vs. State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent. Mr. Ajay Varma i/by Harshad E. Palwe for the petitioner. Ms. A.S. Pai, APP., for the State. Mr. R.A. Shelke i/by Shivajirao Masal for Respondent. CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 27TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. : The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only ground on which the bail application is made is that the applicant­accused has already undergone the imprisonment for a period of six years and, therefore, he deserves to be granted bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of AKHTARI BI (SMT) vs. STATE 2 OF M.P.. (2001) 4 SCC 355 in support of his contention that if the appeals are not disposed of within a period of five years without any fault on the part of the convict, such a convict should be released on bail. 2. We have gone through the said ruling. The facts in that case are entirely different than the one in the present case. In that case the appellant­accused was an old infirm lady and her daughter­in­law has died during the pendency of the trial giving birth to a male child who had to be kept in jail to be looked after by the appellant and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that on facts, the appellant should be released on bail. However, the facts in the present case being entirely different, the ratio of said ruling is not applicable to this case. We further find that the bail application of the accused has already been rejected on the earlier occasion and there is no change in circumstances. 3. The application is, therefore, rejected. ( J. N. PATEL, J.) ( A. A. SAYED, J.)