1 A IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.508 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.65 OF 2007 Ladkya Sarjamya Pawar .. Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Mr.Daulat G.Khamkar for the Applicant. Mr.D.P.Adsule, A.P.P.for the State. CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : MAY 7TH, 2009. P.C. Heard rival submissions for long time. 2. It is in fact, the second application for the earlier bail application which was already heard on merits and disposed of on 25th April, 2007. Apart from such earlier application disposed of on merits, there was still one more application bearing No.48 of 2007 preferred by the present applicant alongwith the other co-accused. However, said earlier application was not pressed by the present applicant accused No.9. Thereafter, after such dismissal of the bail application 2 vide order dated 25th April, 2007 in criminal application No.475 of 2007, another two applications came to be filed, one bearing No.679 of 2007 and another bearing No.1278 of 2008. First such application was dismissed for want of filing copies of earlier disposed of bail application. Second such application i.e. No.1278 of 2008 was before the another court and it was ordered to be taken before the appropriate Court which had earlier dealt with the bail application. Consequently, said application No.1278 of 2008 was taken before the another Court and was disposed of on 9th January, 2009. In fact, this is the latest order on the bail application preferred by the present accused No.9. 3. During the arguments, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that on parity as other co-accused were enlarged on bail, present applicant accused No.9 can also be released on bail. Admittedly, 12 accused were tried for the offence punishable under section 395 and 420 of I.P.C. Present applicant accused No.9 alongwith some co-accused was convicted for the offence punishable under section 395 and was sentenced to suffer R/I.for 7 years and fine of Rs.200/- I/d. further R/I. for 10 days and said conviction was passed on 22nd November, 2006. 4. After considering the rival arguments, and still considering that other co-accused were released on bail, in the opinion of this Court, now there is nothing to view the present matter differently. So far as grant of bail of present applicant accused No.9 is concerned, as his earlier application bearing No.475 of 2007 was rejected by order 3 dated 25th April, 2007 as mentioned above. Considering such situation and considering that there are no any change circumstance for view the matter differently. There is nothing to entertain the present application and same is accordingly dismissed and disposed of. (A.R. JOSHI, J.)