1 Leave granted.

2 The appellant before us is a member of Higher Judicial Service, presently posted as an Additional District Judge in a Fast Track Court. The appellant was Presiding Judge of the Trial Court wherein an accused was facing trial (since 1994) in a criminal case on charges under Ss.420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code . In the year 2001, the accused filed a petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Cr. P.C.") seeking quashing of the proceedings on the ground of delay at the trial. On 8th March, 2001 a learned Single Judge of the High Court hearing the petition filed by the accused, passed an order directing the Trial Court to take all possible steps immediately to ensure that the witnesses were positively examined on 24th April, 2001. The Trial Court was also directed to explain as to why for such a long time, very often process was not issued to the witnesses resulting in prolonging of the trial. The petition under S.482 of the Cr. P.C. was kept pending. It came up for hearing again on 27 April, 2001. The learned counsel for the accused petitioner seems to have complained before the High Court that only 20 witnesses were called by