IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 698/2009 [Narayan Vithoba Mahale vs. State of Maharashtra and others] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 1 st JULY, 2009 Heard Shri G.Mishra, Advocate, for the applicant, Shri Mandpe, APP, for respondent Nos. 1 & 5 and Shri Sirpurkar, Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4. The learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 has raised objection as regards maintainability of this application, which is for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the respondents has relied on the observations of this Court in 1999(3) Mh.L.J. State of Maharashtra vs. Sanjay Moreshwar, wherein, in para 16, it has been observed thus- “16. ....... The procedure laid down by the above referred judgment clearly shows that the aggrieved party can move for cancellation of bail granted by the Court of Sessions under Section 439(2) of the Code on the same facts and circumstances as existed at the time of passing of the order of bail as well as on the basis of new circumstances such as breach of condition, tamper of evidence, misuse of liberty, etc. However, the forums, the aggrieved party will have to approach, will be different depending on the basis on which the cancellation of bail is sought. If cancellation is sought on the same facts and circumstances, then State will have to move the High Court and if it is on the basis of new facts and circumstances, then State will have to move the same Court, which has granted bail. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is that this application for cancellation of bail is basis on new grounds and therefore, as there is application on the basis of new facts and circumstances, the application should have been moved before the same judge. I find substance in the objection. The learned counsel for the applicant has nothing specific to say except the contentions raised in the application. In these circumstances, the application is rejected. However, liberty to the applicant to move for appropriate relief before the Sessions Court. If such application is filed, the learned Sessions Judge is directed to dispose of the same as early as possible in any case within 15 days from the date of service to the respondents. JUDGE Rvjalit