1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 614/2010 (Sayyad Izhar Sayad Ansar vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr A.S. Mardikar, Adv.for applicant Mr D.M.Kale, APP for Respondent CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : July 9, 2010. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, at length. 2. By an order dated 19.1.2010, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad had refused bail in favour of the applicant by a reasoned order, which was also noted by this Court while rejecting Criminal Application No. 162/2010 on 24.2.2010. 3. It is the grievance of the learned Advocate for the applicant that the trial is not likely to be commenced soon and as a consequence of which, the applicant will be constrained to be in jail for an indefinite period. He, therefore, prayed for grant of bail on the ground that it is right of the accused to have expeditious trial. He further contended that the applicant is prepared to withdraw this Application if the trial is held early; charges are framed and material eye witnesses are examined as fast as possible. Learned Advocate for applicant, further, prayed for liberty to apply before the learned trial Judge after 2 alleged eye witnesses in the case, are examined in the trial court and for direction to hold the trial as expeditiously as possible, more so when the applicant is facing serious nature of accusations. 4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of Respondent -State is obviously without instructions from the concerned Investigating Officer; but assures that if the trial is directed to be heard expeditiously, prosecution will do the needful. 5. Under these circumstances, I direct the learned trial Judge to frame charge in the Sessions Case No.61/2009 pending before the learned Sessions Judge Pusad, as expeditiously as possible and conclude the trial within three months from the date of framing of charges. I hope and trust that the prosecution and defence shall also cooperate for early hearing, as directed. 6. Learned Advocate for applicant prayed for liberty to apply for bail on merits after alleged eye witnesses are examined in the trial Court. Liberty granted. 7. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE sahare