1 appa37.11 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.37 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1275 OF 2004 Shidya Nana Tabale. ....Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ....Respondent. Mr. Vaibhav A. Sugdare, advocate appointed for applicant. Ms. S.V.Gajare, APP for State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- JANUARY 24, 2011. P.C. 1. This letter application is received through jail. Twofold reliefs are prayed. The first relief is for granting bail on merits and the second is to expedite hearing of the appeal No. 1275 of 2004. 2. Insofar as the prayer for bail is concerned, it is brought to our notice that the applicant had made similar application in the past, which has been rejected. Since no changed circumstance can be culled out from the record, question of entertaining successive bail application does not arise. Hence that prayer is rejected. 2 appa37.11 3. Insofar as the prayer for expediting hearing of the appeal is concerned, the said appeal is against the order of conviction. No doubt, the applicant is in jail. However, category of cases falling under caption “convicts in jail” have been treated as expedited case as per the present assignment. At present, the appeals pertaining to year 2004 are already notified for final hearing. The applicant will have to stand in queue. However, since the applicant is a senior citizen, the Office to proceed the Criminal Appeal No.1275 of 2004 under caption “convicts in jail-Sr. Citizen” as per its turn. Application disposed of accordingly. 4. Copy of this order be forwarded to the applicant, who is in jail, for information. 5. Court expresses a word of gratitude for able assistance given by the advocate appointed to espouse the cause of the applicant. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)