IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Criminal Misc.2nd Bail Application No.7919/2009 Yushuf @ Ishav @ Mulla vs. State of Rajasthan Dated : 09.10.2009 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. Ranvir Singh, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor for the State. This order governs the disposal of second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by Mr. Ranvir Singh Advocate on behalf of the applicant Yushuf pertaining to F.I.R. No. 355/08 of Police Station M.I.A., Alwar, in the offence under Section 394 of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has canvassed that the petitioner has been in custody for the last six months and not a single witness has been examined by the trial court. The order sheets recorded by the learned trial court suggests that the trial of the case is likely to take time, hence, the petitioner may be granted indulgence of bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application on the ground that the learned trial court has been endeavouring to expedite the trial which is evinced from the order sheet dated 10.09.2009. This order sheet suggests that three witnesses inspite of service of bailable warrant did not appear in the court for evidence, as a result of which, the trial court ordered them to summon through a warrant of arrest, hence, keeping in view the nature of the offence, the bail petition may be dismissed. 5. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and scanned the relevant material available on record, it is true that not a single witness has been examined so far by the learned trial court and the petitioner has been in custody for the last six months, but keeping in view the nature of offence, I, do not find any good ground to change my earlier view and the second bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner also deserves to be dismissed and stand dismissed accordingly. 6. However, keeping in view the speed of trial, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of four months, as the petitioner has been in custody for the last six months. If the process is not issued by the concerned clerk or if having issued the process, the summon or warrants are not executed by the police, learned trial court should take stern action against the defaulters but under all circumstances, trial of the case must be expedited. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. Mak/- s-6