IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22477 of 2009 Harish Kumar Chaudhary @ Harish Chaudhary, Son of Late Yamuna Prasad Vir, residing at Marba Kordha, District Katihar. ------- Petitioner Versus The Central Bureau of Investigation, Patna. ---------- Opposite Party ----------- 6 22.09.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the light of the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner that he has instruction to withdraw this application, this application is dismissed as withdrawn, especially when Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the C.B.I., has got no objection to such withdrawal of this application. This Court, however, must note that the matter, as with regard to grant of bail to the petitioner, had traveled to the Apex Court by assailing the order dated 17.9.2009 admitted this petition for final hearing awaiting the order of Apex Court in S.L.P. (CRL.) No. 2921 of 2009 and the Apex Court by order dated 11.2.2010, had passed the following order:- “Heard counsel for the petitioner. Apart from the present Special Leave Petition, the petitioner has filed another SLP before this Court numbered 2 as SLP (Crl.) No. 2921 of 2009. By virtue of an interim order passed in the other SLP, the trial proceedings pending before the XI Additional Sessions Judge- cum-CBI court, Patna remain stayed. Taking advantage of the stay of the trial proceedings, on a SLP filed by himself, the petitioner now makes the grievance that he remains in jail without grant of bail by the High Court. On hearing counsel for the petitioner, we find no merit in the Special Leave Petition. It is accordingly dismissed.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has also very fairly brought to the notice of this Court yet another order dated 6.8.2010 passed by the Apex Court in the case of the petitioner in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s) 2921/2009 arising out of Cr.W.J.C. No. 8/2008, wherein, specific direction has been given by the Apex Court for concluding the trial, in question, expeditiously in the following terms:- “The trial could not proceed in the case of the petitioner because he was absconding and he was arrested only on 20th December, 2006. We direct the trial Court to conclude the trial in this case as expeditiously as possible. We direct the parties to co-operate with the trial. All questions of law which are raised in the petition are kept 3 open. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly.” Thus, now while the petitioner has voluntarily made a prayer to withdraw his bail application, the order of the Apex Court rejecting his prayer for bail and concluding the trial expeditiously still remains and, therefore, this Court would direct the trial court to ensure that the direction given by the Apex Court is complied in letter and spirit. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is dismissed as withdrawn. Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial court for strict compliance of the direction of the Apex Court. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)