1 3 S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.4650/2009 Ganesh Vs. The State of Rajasthan DATE OF ORDER : 1st December 2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI None present for the petitioner. Mr.Anil Joshi,Public Prosecutor for State. .... BY THE COURT The learned counsel Mr.Firoz Khan who has filed this bail application submits that he is no longer instructed to appear in this matter for the petitioner. None else is present for the petitioner. Nobody was present for the petitioner on the last occasion i.e., on 25.11.2009 either. Prior to that, even on 28.10.2009, nobody was present for the petitioner though an adjournment request had been sent. The learned Public Prosecutor pointed out on the last occasion that the petitioner had been involved in multiple criminal cases right from the year 2000 for varying offences including those under Sections 392, 324, 386, 448, 452, 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; however for nobody being present for the petitioner, consideration of this bail application was deferred and the matter was ordered to be listed today. This bail application, filed as back as on 03.09.2009, has remained pending for all this time with several adjournments and with nobody being present for the petitioner 2 on various occasions. There does not appear any justification to keep this bail application pending any further The petitioner in this case is accused of offence under Section 395 IPC. Looking to the offence the petitioner is charged of and then, considering his antecedents as pointed out by the Public Prosecutor, the petitioner does not appear entitled to any indulgence at this stage. This bail application as filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner Ganesh son of Chand Mal is, therefore, rejected. However, this rejection shall, otherwise, be not of prejudice to the petitioner to apply for bail afresh, of course, in accordance with law. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. s.soni