0707appln3643.09.odt 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD ICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3643 OF 2009 (Kushab s/o Ramchandra Parelwar Vs. State of Maharashtra)) ........................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. GG Bade, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. TD Khade, A.P.P. for the respondent-State. ....... CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATED : 07TH JULY, 2010 Heard the respective Counsel appearing for the parties. In spite of several applications either to the Special Court or to this Court, on earlier occasion, the applicant is approaching this Court again and again by making similar prayers. Apart from this, the applicant-accused is guilty of withholding the facts from this Court and as such, for this lapse a serious view has to be taken. The applicant-accused is prosecuted for the offence under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. It is stated that the case before the trial Court is posted for framing of charge on 09/7/2010. The case is pending since the year 1995. On earlier occasion the applicant presented an application seeking discharge which came to be rejected on 02/11/2004. Against the order of rejection of the application, the applicant approached this Court by filing criminal revision No. 216 of 2004 which also came to be rejected on 09/8/2006. On second occasion, the applicant approached the trial Court with an application seeking discharge which came to be rejected on 15/3/2008. He again presented fresh application on 6/9/2007 vide 0707appln3643.09.odt 2/2 Exh. 55 which also came to be rejected. Again, an application at Exh. 63 came to be presented by the accused for discharge which was also rejected. The applicant-accused again approached this Court by presenting an application bearing No. 1366 of 2008 raising exception to the order passed by the trial Court on 15/3/2008. In the application presented to the High Court, the applicant did not disclose the facts in respect of rejection of his earlier application by the High Court. This Court, while turning down the request made by the applicant, directed him to pay costs of Rs. 1,500/-. In this application also no disclosure is made in respect of rejection of earlier applications. It is vaguely stated in paragraph 7 of the application that some applications were presented earlier to the trial Court and the High Court, which were rejected. The details in respect of the applications presented to the trial Court and to the High Court are not given by the applicant. There is a consistent attempt of withholding material facts from this Court. In view of this matter, while rejecting the instant application, I deemed it appropriate to impose costs of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only). The application is rejected. The applicant is directed to pay costs of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) to the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur within four weeks from today. JUDGE wwl