[ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2397 OF 2008 G.G.A.Naidu ... Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. ... Respondents. Mr.G.G.A.Naidu, petitioner in person. Mrs. A.S.Pai APP for the State. Mr. H.V.Mehta for the Union of India. CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.B.Mhase and : S.B.Mhase and : S.B.Mhase and A.A.Sayed, A.A.Sayed, A.A.Sayed, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : December 2, 2008. : December 2, 2008. : December 2, 2008. P.C. 1. Heard the petitioner in person. 2. The petitioner has raised the ground in respect of the validity of the sanction for prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, we have noticed that the point of sanction was already taken up by the petitioner before the Special Court. The Special Court decided the said point in favour of the petitioner. The said order was challenged by the CBI before this Court by filing Revision. The Revision was allowed and this Court had held that the sanction for prosecution was properly given and remanded back the [ 2 ] matter for further trial. The point of jurisdiction has also been considered by this Court. It is noticed that same grounds have been raised by the petitioner time and again by approaching this court and wasting the time of this court and trying to seek the sympathy of this court by appearing as a party in person and delaying the trial; hence, we impose costs of Rs. 10,000/- upon the petitioner. Costs to be paid within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. The petition is dismissed. 2. Leave to approach Supreme Court is sought by the petitioner. The same is hereby rejected. [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, J.] [S.B.Mhase, J.] J.] [S.B.Mhase, J.] J.] [S.B.Mhase, J.]