IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 43 OF 2005 Smt. M.J. Shreemathy ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents ... Mr. S.G. Deshmukh, for the Applicant. Mr. K.V. Saste, A.P.P., for the State. Respondent No. 2 present in person. ... WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 59 OF 2005 Rayu Govind Mahambare ... Applicant versus Smt. M.J. Shreemathy & anr. ... Respondent ... Applicant present in person. Mr. S.G. Deshmukh, for Respondent No. 1. Mr. K.V. Saste, A.P.P., for the State. ... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 11th January 2005 P.C.: . Heard Mr. Deshmukh for the Applicant in Criminal Application No. 43 of 2005. Already one extension was granted to the Applicant as last opportunity. It is not possible to accept the request for further extension even for the grounds mentioned in the application, because the original order passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 2066 of 2004 was made available to the Applicant long back which alone could be challenged before the Apex Court, if the Applicant was keen on assailing the correctness of that order. Sufficient time has elapsed, and, as mentioned earlier, I see no reason to grant further indulgence. Hence, rejected. . Heard the Applicant in person in Criminal Application No. 59 of 2005. Prayers made in the application are ill-advised. If the Respondent has failed to comply with the order passed by this Court granting time to deposit, then the remedy cannot be cancellation of bail, as is the application preferred before this Court. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)