1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4929 OF 2009 Balkrishna Govind Dingare ........Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. Ajay A. Joshi adv. for the applicant. Mr. A.S. Shitole APP for the Respondent. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI, J. DATED : 18th February, 2010. P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of parties the matter is taken up for final hearing 2. The limited grievance in the present application is that though the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur vide order dated 28­4­2009 has granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, he has directed to appear before the trial court for regular bail after issuance of process. It is the contention of the applicant that in view of the provisions of sec. 437 of Cr.P.C. since the offence under sec. 409 IPC for which the complaint is filed, is punishable with life or death the learned Magistrate will not have jurisdiction and only the Sessions Judge which would be competent to grant bail. 3. Grievance of the applicant appears to be justified. As such order dated 28­4­2009 is modified as under. 4. It is directed that after the issuance of process the 2 applicant would appear before the learned Sessions Judge for grant of regular bail. 4. Rule is made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs. (B.R. Gavai, J.)