- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3975 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.3975 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.3975 OF 2005 Uday Dhaku Sutar ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.K.T.Thomas for the Applicant Ms S.D.Shinde,A.P.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : JUNE 29,2005. : JUNE 29,2005. : JUNE 29,2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. Initially, F.I.R. was registered against the Applicant and co-accused under Section 307 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and later on Section 302 was applied. 2. The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application made by the Applicant for bail. The learned A.P.P. pointed out that today the evidence of P.W.No.1 is being recorded by the learned Trial Judge and the prosecution desires to examine only two more witnesses. The learned A.P.P. on instruction of the Investigating Officer states that the prosecution will make an endeavour to keep the remaining two witnesses present and will cooperate with the learned Trial Judge for expeditious disposal of the trial. 3. In view of this position, this Application is not entertained. In the event the trial is not concluded expeditiously, liberty to the Applicant to make a fresh Application for grant of bail. 4. Subject to the observations made above, Application is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE