1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2721 OF 2009 Pankaj Ramchandra Khatal : Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents .... WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2722 OF 2009 Shaikh Galib Shaikh Harun : Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.Anilkumar Patil for the petitioners. Mrs.U.V.Kejariwal, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondents. .... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : OCTOBER 09, 2009. P.C.: Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor waives service for the respondents. Heard by consent. 2. The petitioners have challenged the orders of the Appellate 2 Authority rejecting their applications for stay. This Court has granted protection for a period of ten days on the last occasion. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submitted that the orders are illegal because they are not speaking orders. A perusal of the orders shows that reasons are recorded, though not elaborately. The main reason is the offences registered against the petitioners. The main orders of externments deal with the activities of the petitioners in detail. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, no ground for interference with the orders is made out. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners be permitted entry into the constituency till the elections are over. Earlier, this Court had permitted the petitioners to enter the constituency for a specified purpose on executing a bond. That period is over. Thereafter, the Court had allowed the petitioners to withdraw the petitions and file an appeal and had extended the period till the stay application is decided. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, it is not appropriate to do so. However, instead it is directed that the appeals be decided expeditiously within a period of four weeks from today. 3. The petitions are dismissed. 4. At this stage, Mr.Patil seeks stay of this order in order to enable 3 the petitioners to approach the Supreme Court. These petitioners are directed against the rejection of applications for stay of the externment orders. The prayer for stay of this order is rejected since staying this order will not make a difference. S.A. BOBDE, J.