1 18APPA.1148-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1148 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1128 OF 2005 Pramod Shankar Jadhav. ..Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. .......... Mr. Ganesh Gole, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. Aruna Pai, A.P.P. for the State. .......... CORAM : A. M. KHANWILKAR AND P. D. KODE, JJ. DATED : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant. On this occasion, the only argument canvassed before us is that the applicant has already undergone 11 years of actual imprisonment. In our opinion, that may be of no avail to the applicant in the fact situation of the present case as the applicant has been convicted for the offence under the provisions of the MCOC Act. Unless the applicant satisfies the test spelt out in the Act, request for bail cannot be acceded to. PPD 2 18APPA.1148-11 2. Realizing this position, Counsel for the applicant submits that at least hearing of appeal may be expedited. Even this request cannot be entertained at this stage, inasmuch as presently this Court is pre-occupied with four Confirmation Cases which are lined up for hearing one after the other. The appeal preferred by the applicant is against the sentence to undergo life imprisonment. That appeal cannot get precedence over the Confirmation Cases. Besides, as per the present assignment, all appeals pertaining to year 2005 have been assigned to this Bench which itself is an expedited category. The applicant will have to await his turn in appeals pertaining to year 2005. 3. Application is disposed of accordingly. (P. D. KODE, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)