1 , IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 580 of 2010 Murli v. State of Maharashtra -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr Amol Mardikar, Adv for applicant Mr D.M. Kale, APP for State Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 4.8.2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 65/2008 registered with Police Station, Tumsar for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 457, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier, two applications for bail have been rejected by this Court. This Court, however, while rejecting the application for bail vide order dated 25th August 2009 expected the trial Court to expeditiously decide the trial. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on Smt Akhtari v. State of MP reported in 2001 Cri.L.J. 1727 to contend that applicant is entitled to be released on bail if prolonged delay in disposal of trial has occurred for no fault on the part of applicant. 3. Report from the District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara has been received. It could be gathered from the report that for one or the other authentic reason, charge could not be 2 framed and trial could not begin. 4. Be that as it may, this Court has already directed expeditious trial. Learned trial Court shall continue to adopt coercive process of securing presence of absconding accused; shall frame charge and begin trial within three months from today. It is made clear that if trial does not begin and material/eye witnesses are not examined within three months from the date of receipt of this order by the trial Court, applicant shall be entitled to make application for grant of bail before the Sessions Court concerned for want of speedy trial. With these observations, application stands disposed of. Judge. joshi