..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3876 OF 2008 Shri Bharat Pandurang Jadhav. ..Applicant. -Versus- The State of Maharashtra and another. ..Respondents. .... Mr.B.R.Patil, Advocate with Mr.Ujwal Agandsurve, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2009. DATED : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2009. DATED : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2009. [IN CHAMBER, 2:40 PM] P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in CR No.181 of 2008 of Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur. The said case is mainly under Sections 420 and 392 of Indian Penal Code. 3. The applicant had earlier preferred an application for anticipatory bail which came to be rejected by this Court by order dated 13th August, 2008. The case against the applicant is that he has cheated the complainant stating that he would give him gold. However, thereafter the applicant ..(2).. did not give gold to the complainant as promised by him. Hence, FIR came to be lodged by the complainant. 4. The applicant has preferred this application for anticipatory bail on the ground that some settlement talks were going on between the applicant and the complainant. Hence, notice came to be issued to the complainant. However, the I.O. on instructions states that the complainant does not wish to settle the matter. 5. No fresh change in circumstance has been brought to my notice so as to necessitate the reconsideration of the earlier order. Hence, application is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)