IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.224 OF 2005 Pravin Shrikant Girkar ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.225 OF 2005 Sudhir Sugandh More ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Santosh R.Dubey for Applicant. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. FEBRUARY 3, 2005. FEBRUARY 3, 2005. FEBRUARY 3, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The apprehension of the Applicants is that although the proceedings are not finally concluded, the concerned Officer is insisting that the Applicants should execute some bond. I find no : 2 : reason to accept this apprehension because it is well settled that person can be required to execute bond only after final orders are passed by the Authority after complying necessary procedure. Applicants claim that they have already filed their replies to the show cause notice. If it is so, the Authorities will examine the stand taken in the replies and pass appropriate orders, as may be permissible by law. 2. All questions are left open, to be decided in the said proceedings. 3. Applications disposed of with the above observations. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.