1 appa672.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Application No. 672 of 2010 IN Criminal Appeal No. 376 of 2010 Sanjay Bapuso Sasne ....Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Shekhar Ingawale for the applicant. Dr. F.R.Shaikh-APP for respondent/State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND U.D. SALVI, JJ DATED:- SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 P.C. In our order dated 8th September, 2010, we called upon Mr. D.Y.Joshi- Assistant Superintendent, District Court,Kolhapur to appear and produce the original record. Written explanation given by Mr. Joshi is taken on record. Now it transpires that communication regarding R & P was sent by our office on 28th July, 2010 which writ was received by the said Mr.Joshi-Superintendent of District Court, Kolhapur on 7th August, 2010 who in turn forwarded the same to 2 appa672.10.sxw District Judge on 10th August, 2010. The R & P was received by Mr.Joshi on 30th August, 2010. However, he did not immediately forward the R & P to this Court on the specious ground that he had no information as to the next date of hearing of the matter before this Court. That explanation in our opinion is unacceptable. Inasmuch as, once R & P writ has been received from this Court, the Superintendent-District Court was obliged to take action to forward the R & P with immediate despatch. The fact that R & P was received by him from District Judge on 30th August, 2010 is admitted by Mr. Joshi. Further, the fact that he was not aware of the next date of hearing before the Court does not take the matter any further. Irrespective of whether the matter was to be proceeded before this Court, he was expected to forward the R & P immediately on his own. Indeed, the fact that the matter was listed on 8th September, 2010 was informed to Mr. Joshi on telephone only on 8th September, 2010 and he could not, therefore, arrange to send R & P immediately on 8th September, 2010. However, there has been inaction on the part of Mr. Joshi between 30th August, 2010 till 8th September, 2010. In view of the above, we make it clear that said Mr. D.Y. Joshi-Assistant Superintendent will not be entitled for TA & DA expenses incurred by him for attending this Court proceedings today. We leave the matter at that. 3 appa672.10.sxw 2. Reverting to the merits of the bail application, from the R & P which has been received, it is obvious that the finding recorded by the trial Court that entry regarding history of injury has been recorded in MLC register at Exhibit 43 can be noticed from the said document. As that finding cannot be overturned as observed by us in our order dated 31st August, 2010, the argument of the Applicant as recorded in the said order will have to be rejected. In other words, insofar as argument on merits to release the applicant on bail, the same does not commend to us. The same is rejected. As a consequence, the Application for bail should fail. The same is dismissed. 3. As the R & P has been received, it will be open to the Appellant to file private paper-book so that the Appeal can proceed under expedited category of cases to be notified as ‘convict in jail’ as per its turn. . Copy of this order be marked to the District Judge, Kolhapur for information and necessary action. (U.D. SALVI, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)