1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JUTISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4645 OF 2009 Raju @ Hanmantu Kallappa Gaikwad & Ors. .... Applicants. V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent. Mr. Manoj M. Kadam for the applicants. Mr. P.G. Sarda for the original complainant. Mr. J.P. Kharge, APP for the State. CORAM: V/.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 5H NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. Counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the application with liberty to file a fresh application after some time. 2. Application is allowed to be withdrawn. 3. The grievance is made by the learned Counsel for the applicant that though trial is expedited, prosecution has not 2 produced accused before the Court for about 6 months and, as a result, the case is not committed to the Sessions Court. On the other hand, Counsel for the complainant submits that the matter is now fixed for framing of charge before the Sessions Court. 4. Be that as it may, the Investigating Officer is directed to ensure that accused are produced before the Court on the relevant dates and no delay is caused in producing the witnesses before the Court since the trial is already expedited. (V.M. KANADE, J.)