1 ABA-357.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.357 OF 2011 {For Anticipatory Bail} Chetan Rajindernath Dogra .... Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Shri Subhash Jha i/b M/s. Law Global for the Applicant. Ms G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: APRIL 26, 2011 P.C: The applicant harbours an imaginary fear that if he does not remain present in the Sessions Court tomorrow, his application will be rejected on that ground. This Court had already indicated while deciding Criminal Application No.185 of 2011 that insistence on the presence of the applicant at the first hearing of the application for anticipatory bail would be counter-productive and the question of the applicant's presence would arise only if the Court passes some interim order in favour of the applicant. The applicant may bring this to the notice of the learned 2 ABA-357.11 Sessions Judge. There is no question of granting any protection since the Sessions Court is seized of the matter. The application is accordingly disposed of. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)