1 1.appp.231.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ata CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.231 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.587 OF 2011 M/s. Fire Protection Systems .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors .. Respondents Mr. Rohit M. Sanghvi- Applicant in person present. Mr. A. S. Shitole,APP for State. Dr. P. C. Gandhi,for Respondent No.1 in person. CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL,J. DATE : 24.08.2011 P.C.: Heard learned Counsel. A very sorry state of affair is projected by the applicant in person. He informs that in spite of there being an order in terms of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against respondents, he is not in a position to enjoy the fruits thereof, as appeal preferred by the Respondents challenging the conviction is awaiting result since 2006. The applicant in person submits that he has to move all along from Mumbai with his ailing Advocate to prosecute the appeal as required and to face adjournments at the behest of respondent in present application. 2 1.appp.231.11.sxw 2 Without adverting to the allegations made against the respondent herein, the fact remain that the appeal moved by the respondent is pending before the Learned Sessions Judge, from 2006. The Learned Sessions Judge uninfluenced by any gestures of the parties, shall scrupulously decide the ongoing appeal within the time frame upto 31st December, 2011. The parties to appear before the Learned Judge on 16th September, 2011. 3 If the Respondent or the party in person seeks accommodation, it would be naturally meet with dire consequence including saddling cost or even resulting in dismissal of the appeal, on available record. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. )