( 1. ) SHRI B. L. Bhargava, counsel for the applicant and Shri M. N. Pendharkar, learned panel lawyer for the State are heard on the question of grant of bail.

( 2. ) THE state has no right to oppose the hail application in view of the fact that the applicants have to wait for commencement of the trial up to 1st Jan. , 1979. If the State cannot provide for adequate machinery for dispensing justice quickly, the State cannot be heard to say that the applicants should be kept in custody without trial up to such a long time. The remedy can be by way of increasing the strength of Judges competent to try such cases, but certainly, paucity of the time with the existing judicial machinery to try the accused expeditiously can be no ground for refusal of the bail. In such cases as a general rule bails should be granted. It is against all concepts of human liberty that in such circumstances the applicants should be refused bail. For inability of the Court, the under-trial accused persons should not be and cannot be permitted to be kept in judicial custody.

( 3. ) ACCORDINGLY, I deem it fit to direct that the applicants be released on bail, if the applicants furnish solvent security to