- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4480 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.4480 OF 2005 APPLICATION NO.4480 OF 2005 Noor Mohammed Shaikh ...Applicant vs. The Inspector of Police & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Rahul S. Thakur for the Applicant Mr.U.V.Nikam,A.P.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : AUGUST 9,2005 : AUGUST 9,2005 : AUGUST 9,2005 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. for State. The offence alleged against the Applicant is under Sections 397, 398, 394, 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. While rejecting the application for bail made by the Applicant, the learned Sessions Judge has already expedited the trial. 3. The learned A.P.P. on instruction of Police Constable Mr.J.M.Sabale, B.No.162 attached to Panvel City Police Station states that five witnesses have already been examined in the trial and the prosecution desires to examine only four more witnesses. The learned Counsel for the Applicant stated that he has no instructions and therefore he is not aware whether the trial is commenced. The statement made by the learned A.P.P. is accepted. In view of the fact that the trial has made substantial progress, no case is made out for grant of bail. Application is rejected. The learned Trial Court is - 2 - directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE