LAKHPATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

(2.) THE contention of the present petitioner is that he has been arrested on 9.7.2009 and in two years, trial has not been proceed. Except framing of charge, nothing has been done in the trial. Not a single witness has been examined in spite of the order of this Court for expediting the trial. The present petitioner could not be kept in jail for an indefinite period. The order-sheets of the concerned court have also been placed on record. It has been further submitted that in other case, the present petitioner has been enlarged on bail and additional charge-sheet has been filed against the co-accused in the present matter and now the matter is posted for framing of charge against the co-accused. The trial will definitely take time, hence he should be released on bail.

(3.) HAVING considered the order-sheets of the court below, it clearly reveals that the charge has been framed against the present petitioner on 8.10.2009. Thereafter for about two years not a single witness has been examined. This Court has directed in the order dated 14.3.2012 in the earlier bail application filed by the present petitioner that the trial should be done expeditiously and it was also observed that on various dates process of witnesses has not been issued in spite of the order. No endeavour has been made by the court below to proceed with the trial. Now additional charge-sheet has been filed against the co-accused on 14.9.2011, till the date charges have not been framed against the co-accused. This shows the slackness of the court below and the order of this Court dated 14.3.2012 has not been observed.