A. S. QURESHI, J. ( 1 ) RULE. Mr. S. R. Divetia learned A. P. P. appear and waives service of Rule. ( 2 ) THE petitioner herein was granted bail by this Court (Coram: D. C. Gheewala J.) on 26-9-1984 with certain conditions imposed on the petitioner. By the present application the petitioner seeks modification of those conditions viz. that the petitioner will not leave the local limits of Bhuj District without previously intimating the Police Station Officer at Lakhpat and in no case the petitioner shall leave local limits of Gujarat State without written permission of this Court. ( 3 ) MR. C. H. Vora learned counsel for the petitioner states that more than two and half years have elapsed and the prosecution has not filed the chargesheet. In the circumstances according to Mr. Vora the conditions imposed work considerable hardship on the petitioner. The petitioner is a Customs Officer posted at Lakhpat in Kutch District. He belongs to Haryana State. Hence according to Mr. Vora in view of enormously long delay in conducting the trial the aforesaid conditions be modified. ( 4 ) MR. Divetia learned A. P. P. has fairly stated that the prosecution has taken long time in proceeding with the case. In the circumstances of the case he states on instructions from the Investigating Officer that he has no objection if the aforesaid conditions are waived. ( 5 ) IT is indeed surprising that the prosecution has not filed chargesheet for such a long time as two and half years. It is true that the petitioner is on bail. But that is no ground for delaying the trial for years. An accused person is entitled to be tried reasonably promptly and know the result with regard to his guilt or innocence. An accused person cannot be kept indefinitely under cloud without being told whether he is guilty or not. The fact that a person is to be tried for certain offence would keep the Democles sword hanging on his head till he is actually tried and the result is known. This would amount to mental torture which cannot be permitted to go on indefinitely. The very fact that the chargesheet has not been filed for over two and half years shows that the prosecution has no material available to it on the basis of which the accused could be chargesheeted. This would amount to mental torture which cannot be permitted to go on indefinitely. The very fact that the chargesheet has not been filed for over two and half years shows that the prosecution has no material available to it on the basis of which the accused could be chargesheeted. If that is so the prosecution must be honest and fair and drop the proceedings. It is not only unfair but also oppressive to the accused to keep him in suspense for an unreasonably long period. The prosecution must make up its mind within a reasonable time whether to proceed with the prosecution or to drop it if there is not enough material before it. In the circumstances of the present case it would be necessary and proper to give direction to the respondent-State to make up its mind within a short period whether it wants to drop the proceedings or to carry on with the prosecution. ( 6 ) IN the result the petition is allowed. The aforesaid condition is modified to the extent that the petitioner may leave Gujarat State and go to his native Haryana or anywhere else after informing the Police Station Officer at Lakhpat stating the approximate date of his departure and the date of his return. The condition with regard to reporting at Lakhpat Police Station once a week is cancelled. The respondent is directed to make up its mind regarding prosecuting the petitioner. If the respondent State decides to prosecute the petitioner the charge-sheet shall be filed on or before 15-12-1986. In that event the trial Court is directed to conduct the trial deligently and conclude it within two months after filing the chargesheet. Rule made absolute to the above extent. Petition allowed .