1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.521/2010 Applicant :- Sau. Sonali w/o Suraj Thakare Aged about 26 years, Occu : Business & Household work, r/o Plot No.26, Sadashiv Nagar, Wathoda Road, Nagpur. ...Versus... Non-applicant:- State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. Tahsil, P.S. Nagpur. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri F.T. Mirza, Adv. for applicant] [Shri D.B. Patel, APP for non-applicant] CORAM:- A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED :- 29.03.2010 1. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the present applicant in Crime No.85/2008 registered with Police Station Tahsil, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 406, 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Earlier Criminal Application No.594/2009 was filed by the applicant and this Court on 20.2.2009 made an order asking the applicant to remain present in the Court on 24.2.2009 at 10.30 a.m. and to make statement regarding refund of money to the finance company within fixed time. 3. The applicant did not comply this order at all and that application came to be dismissed on 24.2.2009. 4. This Court specifically asked learned Counsel for the applicant as to whether the applicant is even now ready to pay 2 back the entire money to the finance company in terms of the said order dated 20.2.2009 though learned Counsel for the applicant on behalf of his client expressed inability to do so. Thus, though order was already passed the applicant has not made up her mind to pay back the money to the finance company. The application lacks bona fide apart from the fact that second application for anticipatory bail is in the nature of review and no subsequent events are allegedly averred. For both these reasons, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present criminal application. The same is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE SSW