mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4098 OF 2007 Krishna Pandurang Patil & Anr. .. Applicants versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b M.K. Kocharekar for the applicants Ms.Rajeshree M. Gadhvi APP for the State. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 19th December 2007 P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP for the State. 2. This application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been made by the applicants in connection with offences registered under C.R.No.221/07 with Ulhasnagar Police station. 3. Previously, the applicants had applied for bail before the learned Sessions Judge. On 12th December 2007, the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the same. 4. It is settled principle of law that anticipatory bail should not be of unlimited duration. It should generally come to an end after filing of the charge-sheet so that the accused can approach for bail to the regular court before the charge-sheet has been filed. The regular court would then have the benefit of the material before it for considering for grant of regular bail. In the present case, charge-sheet has been filed. It would therfore be appropriate to direct the applicants to approach the appropriate court for regular bail. 5. From the order of the learned Sessions Judge, it appears that the applicants were absconding after the crime. In view of this also it would not be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail at this stage. Accordingly, application for anticipatory bail is rejected with liberty to the applicants to move the appropriate court for regular bail. If such application is made, the court shall consider the same on its own merits without being in any manner influenced by the observations made in this order. (D.G. KARNIK, J)