IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39057 of 2009 HOSIL YADAV @ HOSILA YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 9.12.2009 Heard. The petitioner’s grievance is that he is not getting his trial as expeditiously as could be expected in a case in which the witnesses are all police personnel. The grievance of the petitioner may not be baseless inasmuch as if the police personnel are not produced before the court to depose in cases, then who else could produce other persons who are cited as witnesses in different criminal cases. I direct the Superintendent of Police, Bagaha to ensure that the witnesses of Dhanaha P.S. Case no. 26 of 2007 ( T.R. No. 1406 of 2009), who are said to be police personnel, are produced in the court below on day to day basis. Though there could not be any reason for this court to direct the court below to submit a list of witnesses to the Superintendent of Police but considering that the Superintendent of Police is not inconvenienced, I direct the S.D.J.M. Bagaha, the learned trial magistrate who is trying the above noted case, to send a notice for production of witnesses to the Officer Incharge of Dhanaha Police station appending thereto the list of witnesses indicated in the charge sheet. A copy of such a notice shall also be forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, who shall ensure that the witnesses are produced in the above noted case. The best course for production of the witnesses could be that the Superintendent of Police should stop - 2 - the salary of witnesses who are the police personnel unless they produce before him the certificate issued by the trial court that they had appeared and deposed in the court below in the above noted case. The trial must be concluded in nine months time at any rate from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the present order. The petition is dismissed with the aforementioned direction. Anil/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)