1 BA : 1802/2011 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1802 of 2011 IN S.C. NO. 463 OF 2011 Mr. Sijin Gopinath Nair .. Applicant -Versus- The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Ms. Apeksha Vora for applicant. Mr. S.A. Shaikh APP for State. CORAM : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 30th November, 2011. P.C.:- 1. This application for bail has been filed in view of the order dated 26th July 2011 passed by this Court on earlier Bail Application No.1117 of 2011. By that order, the bail application was rejected and the trial Court was directed to expedite the trial with further direction to complete it within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. The applicant was also granted liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over within that time. 2 BA : 1802/2011 2. The trial in the present proceeding commenced on 15th October 2011. So far six witnesses have been examined by the prosecution with four witnesses remaining. They are two panchas, Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer. The report filed by the police shows that after the order of this Court dated 26th July 2011, the matter was adjourned on 9 dates, as the applicant was not produced before the Court. Thereafter when the matter was taken up on 2nd August 2011, it was required to be adjourned at the instance of the advocate for the applicant. On the next day i.e. on 12th August 2011, the applicant filed application for discharge. That application was heard on 23rd August 2011 and 26th August 2011. It came to be disposed off on 30th August 2011. On the date thereafter i.e. on 15th September 2011, co-accused of the applicant sought an adjournment to change his lawyer. The new Advocate filed his appearance on 3rd October 2011 and sought an adjournment for preparing himself in the matter. On 12th October 2011, the applicant herein requested that he be furnished with an Advocate at the expense of the State Government. In this way, the trial could be commenced only on 15th October 2011. The cross- examination of the complainant thereafter took more than a month. It is thus obvious that the delay in disposal of the case is on account of the applicant and his co-accused. They cannot be allowed to take advantage of their dilatory tactics. Besides the trial is reaching its end. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The application is dismissed. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J)