1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1212 OF 2010 Mr.Nandkumar Suresh Kedari and anr. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr.A.P.Mundergi, Sr.Advocate i/by S. Mehta for the Applicant. Mr. Y.S.Shinde, APP. for the State. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 23rd March, 2010 PC : 1 This is a sixth anticipatory bail application made by the present applicants who are shown as absconding accused in C.R.No.20/2008 registered by Jaigad Police Station, Ratnagiri for alleged offences under Section 384, 387, 436, 511 read with 120B of the I.P.C. and U/s. 3 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. Out of the earlier five bail applications filed in this court two applications were withdrawn and three were 2 rejected. Last rejection order was passed on 24.10.2008. In spite of this position, it is clear that the applicant did not surrender. Trial against the co accused proceeded and according to the applicants material that was used against the present applicants could not proved at the trial and therefore, co accused were acquitted. This acquittal according to the applicants is the change of circumstance. The applicants state that as the co accused were acquitted, they are also likely to be acquitted. In the circumstances, they may be granted anticipatory bail. This argument is misconceived. After applicants are arrested, the possibility of fresh evidence cannot be ruled out. The prosecution will also be entitled to make an attempt to prove the material which was held not to be proved. In the circumstances, not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, application is rejected. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)