... 1 ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5477 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5477 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5477 OF 2005 Shahin Sherkhan Pathan ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri. R. M. Momin for the Applicant. Shri. A.S. Gadkari, A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : AUGUST 29, 2005. DATE : AUGUST 29, 2005. DATE : AUGUST 29, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the Advocate appearing for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Offence registered against the Applicant and the co-accused is under sections 395, 342, 336 of the Indian Penal Code and section 26(F) and 30 of the Indian Forest Act. 3. The learned A.P.P. pointed out that investigation is not complete. He stated on instructions that investigation will be completed within a period of two weeks from today and chargesheet will be filed soon thereafter. He pointed out that the co-accused are absconding. 4. After having heard the Advocates appearing for the paties and after cosidering the material collected during the investigation, in my view, this is not a case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail before completion of the investigation. The statement ... 2 ... of the learned A.P.P. for the State that the investigation will be completed within a period of two weeks is accepted. 5. Application is rejected. However, the Applicant will be entitled to make fresh Application for bail after chargesheet is filed. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE