S. I. JAFRI, J. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel for the State. 2 This is a third application for bail on behalf of the applicant. The earlier two applications for bail on behalf of the applicant stand rejected by this Court on merits. However, on merit, there remains nothing to be considered and this application is liable to be rejected bat the learned counsel for the applicant Sri M. Islam, Advocate commisseritingly submits that the applicant has been incarcerated in prison since 1st March, 1988 and that so far no steps have been initiated in order to commit the applicant-accused to the Court of Sessions enabl ing the Court of Sessions to commence the trial of the applicant. Since March 1988, about nine months have rolled by and it is very painful that the case is yet awaiting committal to the Court of Sessions. This court is not cognizant of what has really delayed the committal of the applicant to the Court of Sessions, but the period of nine months is quite a long period and it is really a sorry state of affairs at the ends of Chief Judicial Magistrate that he sat tight over the matter without realising that he is negating the provisions contained in Cr. P. C. as well as the provisions enshrined in the Constitution of India which guarantee the right of speedy trial to the accused persons, by his act in delaying the committal of the case to the Court of Sessions. The Chief Judicial Magistrate must realise that Jails are the dumping ground for the persons arraigned of offences and courts should not turn a blind eye to their plight nor should the Courts deny to the accused persons to what they are entitled under Law of the land. In the past also, such acts of omission on the part of the courts below, had come to the notice of this. Court and a directive was issued to all concerned specially the Chief Judicial Magistrates of the State, but recently such lapses have again started on the part of the courts below and as such I am compelled to feel that the directions issued by this Court have not been taken seriously. Hence in the instant case. I have no option except to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. Hence in the instant case. I have no option except to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. Let applicant Sri Narain Rai alias Chunnu involved in case Crime No. 50 of 1988 under Sections 307/34, I. P. C. P. S. Madhuban, district: Azamgarh, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 70001- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C. J. M. , Azamgarh. 4. Before parting, I may observe that under law Courts are called upon to ensure speedy trial and any lapse by a court of Jaw may create disastrous conse quences and it would be a negation of justice its. 5. Let a copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the applicant on payment of usual charges within 24 hours. Office is directed to send 2. copy of this order each to the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned as well as to the learned District Judge, Azamgarh. Learned District Judge is directed to summon the Magistrate concerned and impress upon him the exigency in speedily committing the cases to the Court of Sessions. Order accordingly. .