IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4823 OF 2004 Vikas @ Vicky @ Vijay Ganapat Lad ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ...... Mr.P.R.Arjunwadkar for Applicant. Mr.K.V.Saste, A.P.P. for Respondent. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. JANUARY 11, 2005. JANUARY 11, 2005. JANUARY 11, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the two orders passed by the Sessions Court, rejecting the Bail Application preferred by the Applicant. 2. I see no reason to depart from the conclusion reached by the Sessions Court in rejecting the Bail Application, having regard to the materials on record to indicate the complicity of the Applicant and the seriousness of the : 2 : offence. Moreover, there is no reason to depart from the opinion expressed by the Sessions Court that the possibility of tampering evidence, if the Applicant is released on bail or that the Applicant not becoming available for the trial, also cannot be ruled out. 3. In the circumstances, not a case for bail. Rejected. However, the Sessions Court, Thane, is directed to assign the case to the Fast Track Court, if not already done, so as to ensure early disposal of the trial. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.