[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.574 OF 2008 IN CRI.APPLN.NO.2791 OF 2008 Mr.Milind D.Gupte ..Applicant Vs. Mr.Sarvasiddhi Krishna Mohan and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.M.S.Mohite Advocate along with Mr.G.H.Keluskar Advocate for applicant Mr.A.M.Saraogi Advocate for Respondent No.1-accused Mr.A.R.Patil A.P.P. for the State ... WITH CRI.APPLICATION NO.18 OF 2009 IN W.P.NO.2033 OF 2008 Mr.Sarvasiddhi Krishnamohan ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent .... Mr.A.M.Saraogi Advocate for Mr.Hitesh Patel Adv. for applicant Mr.M.S.Mohite Advocate along with Mr.G.H. Keluskar Advocate for Respondent No.2 Mr.A.R.Patil A.P.P. for the State .... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JANUARY 20, 2009 DATE : JANUARY 20, 2009 DATE : JANUARY 20, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Criminal Application No.18 of 2009 is taken on [-2-] board as connected matter is on board. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original complainant in Application No.574 of 2008, the learned advocate for the respondent no.1-original accused in Application No.574 of 2008 who is also the applicant in Cri.Application No.18 of 2009 and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. CR No. 4 of 2007 came to be lodged at EOW GBCB CID against the respondent no.1-accused on complaint of the present applicant. The said CR pertains to Case No.294/PW/2007 which is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai. The case is mainly under Section 420 of IPC. The respondent-accused preferred an application for anticipatory bail before this Court. By order dated 29.8.2008, this Court disposed of the said application directing that in case, the police wants to take the applicant into custody in the said case, then seven days notice be given to the applicant prior to his arrest. 3. The learned advocate for the applicant-complainant has stated that the [-3-] respondent-accused has not appeared before the trial Court till today. As the accused did not appear before the trial Court, proclamation and non-bailable warrant came to be issued against the respondent-accused. As the proclamation and non-bailable warrant came to be issued against the respondent-accused, he preferred Criminal Writ Petition No.2033 of 2008 for setting aside the said proclamation and non-bailable warrant. By order dated 24.11.2008, this Court disposed of the said writ petition No.2033 of 2008 observing that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of preferring application before the trial Court for setting aside the said order issuing proclamation and the order issuing non-bailable warrant. At that time, the learned advocate for the petitioner made a statement before the Court that the petitioner would appear before the trial Court. In view of the said statement, petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prefer appropriate proceedings before the trial Court. To enable the petitioner to prefer necessary proceedings before the trial Court, in respect of setting aside the proclamation and the non-bailable warrant, the said proclamation and non-bailable [-4-] warrant was stayed for a period of four weeks from the date of the order. 4. Mr.Mohite has submitted that though the statement has been made before this Court that the petitioner would appear before the trial Court, till today, the petitioner had not appeared before the trial Court. Mr.Saraogi states that in fact, the petitioner had appeared before the trial Court and he will produce Roznama to show that the accused had appeared before the trial Court. However, at this stage, I do not feel it necessary to enter into this controversy as Mr.Saraogi on instructions stated that the accused will appear before the trial Court within a period of three weeks from today. Mr.Saraogi further stated that the accused-respondent will furnish his residential address to the Investigating Officer as well as to the learned advocate for the complainant within a period of seven days from today. Mr.Saraogi also states that in this matter he will accept the copy of any notice sought to be served on his client and he will inform his client accordingly. Mr.Saraogi further stated that Investigating Officer and the learned advocate for the complainant will be [-5-] informed the day on which the accused will appear before the trial Court. He further stated that within three weeks the accused will prefer application before the trial Court for setting aside the proclamation and non-bailable warrant. 5. In this view of the matter, time period mentioned in the order dated 24.11.2008 is extended by a period of three weeks from today. It is made clear as far as the order dated 29.8.2008 is concerned, as the applicant has already been granted bail in this case, this order no longer survives. 6. If the accused appears before the trial Court within a period of ten days and prefers necessary application, the said application be disposed of by the trial Court as far as possible within ten days thereafter. 7. Both the applications are disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]