- 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.2423 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO.2423 OF 2006 APPLICATION NO.2423 OF 2006 Franky Paul Francis ...Applicant vs. Intelligent Officer & anr. ...Respondents Mr.S.M.Mishra for the Applicant Mr.Mr.D.N.Salvi for Respondent No.1 Ms S.V.Gajare,A.P.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : SEPTEMBER 25,2006. : SEPTEMBER 25,2006. : SEPTEMBER 25,2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocates appearing for the parties. As earlier bail application filed by the applicant was rejected by me, as per the administrative order passed by the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, this Application was kept before me. 2. After having heard the Advocates for the parties and after perusing the application, I find that no case of existence of change in circumstances has been made out requiring interference with the view taken by me earlier. 3. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that in terms of liberty granted under Order dated 22nd August 2005, the Applicant has applied to the Trial Court for expeditious hearing. He submitted that the trial has hardly made any progress. He submitted that time bound programme may be fixed for conclusion of the trial. The Advocate for the first Respondent submitted that there are many trials pending before - 2 - the learned Special Judge and many of the said trials are High Court Expedited Trials. 4. No case is made out for grant of bail. Application is rejected. However, the learned Trial Judge is directed the decide the Application of the Applicant for expeditious disposal of the trial. The learned Special Judge is bound to take into consideration the fact that the Applicant is in custody from the year 2004. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE