IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23415 of 2010 LAXMAN SAO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 21.7.2010 Heard. Considering the circumstances which have been put down in the first rejection order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22147 of 2008, the Court is still not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. However, the Court is concerned about the incarceration and slow pace of trial, specially, considering that the trial court has immense powers for enforcing production of the witnesses. I recommend to the learned trial Judge to look to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shailendra Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in A.I.R. 2002 S.C.270 as also to consult the provision of Section 170(2) Cr. P.C. and issue a notice to the Officer-in-charge of the Police Station by which the case had been investigated into appending the list of witnesses thereto directing him to also remain present in his court with the witnesses. Let the learned Judge be further requested to send a copy of such notice to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, who will ensure production of the witnesses of Gardanibagh P.S.Case No. 251 of 2007 giving rise to Sessions Trial No. 295 of 2008 and ensure that the trial is brought to a conclusion in a period of one year from the date the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna/ Officer-in-charge of 2 Gardanibagh Police Station receives notice as indicated above. In case the court is not getting proper assistance , the court may look to the provision of Section 309 Cr. P.C., impose cost on the State of Bihar for dilating the trial and direct realisation of the same from the salary of the Officer-in-charge of Gardanaibagh Police Station and it shall be ensured that the amount of cost is deducted from his salary and entry to that effect is made in his service record and the same is deposited in the Nazarat of the civil court. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)