JUDGMENT - J.G. CHITRE, J.:---Heard. 2. A very strong case has come before this Court by way of a criminal application filed by the applicant who happens to be a witness in Criminal Case No. 144 of 1996 pending in the Court of 2nd Joint Civil Judge, J.D. J.M.F.C., Ulhasnagar. The parties are State-complainant and Hari Narayan Talreja and one another. This prosecution revolves around the provisions of M.R.T.P. Act. Though a revision petition has been filed by the petitioner, this Court is taking cognizance of this petition in view of provisions of section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and thinks it proper to exercise its inherent power for ensuring the smooth course of administration of justice. This Court finds it necessary to invoke inherent powers of this Court for the purposes of neeping out such improper practices which are being followed as it has been depicted by the present matter, in the interest of justice and for benefit of public at large. 3. Mrs. Gupta pointed out that the petitioner and other prosecution witnesses were summoned to give evidence as prosecution witnesses in the said criminal case by the order of the trial Court on 6-8-2000. They remained present in the Court on 24-8-2000 but their evidence was not recorded. Hearing of the said case was adjourned to 13-9-2000. On that date also the petitioner and other prosecution witnesses who were earlier present in the Court on 24-8-2000 were present. The hearing was adjourned to 5-10-2000. On 5-10-2000 also the present applicant was present in the Court for giving evidence along with other witnesses. The case was not taken up for hearing and was adjourned to 24-10-2000. On 24-10-2000 also the applicant and other witnesses were present. Their evidence was not recorded and hearing was adjourned to 4-11-2000. The present applicant was also present on 4-11-2000. His evidence was not recorded and the trial was adjourned to 21-11-2000. On 21-11-2000 also the present applicant was present. His evidence was not recorded and the hearing of the case was adjourned to 7-12-2000. On 7-12-2000 also the present applicant was present but his evidence was not recorded and adjournment was granted and the hearing was adjourned to 18-1-2001. The Court ordered that the accused should pay the witnesses costs of Rs. 50/- per witness. His evidence was not recorded and the hearing of the case was adjourned to 7-12-2000. On 7-12-2000 also the present applicant was present but his evidence was not recorded and adjournment was granted and the hearing was adjourned to 18-1-2001. The Court ordered that the accused should pay the witnesses costs of Rs. 50/- per witness. On 18-1-2001 the Court ordered that the bailable warrants be issued against the witnesses who were not present on that date. 4. After the bailable warrant was issued against the applicant on 18-1-2001, the applicant in response to that bailable warrant attended the Court on 31-1-2001. Even on that date his evidence was not recorded. He was required to come again to the same Court on 14-2-2001. Again his evidence was not recorded and after that, he was attending the Court continuously on 15-3-2001, 21-4-2001, 26-4-2001, 5-5-2001, 16-6-2001, 30-7-2001 and lastly 4-8-2001. Ms. Gupta submitted that he is attending the Court continuously after 4-8-2001 also and his evidence is yet not being recorded and that has given the birth to this serious grievance which has been put forth by the applicant by this revision application which has been now converted into the petition invoking powers of this Court in view of provisions of section 482 of the Code. 5. Ms. Gupta submits that there is a limit for a witness to attend the Court and to go back to his home without his evidence being recorded. She submitted that the applicant does not know as to when his evidence would be recorded and till his evidence is being recorded he is required to attend the Court from 11.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. She submitted that the trial Court be directed to record the evidence of this witness and other witnesses and to exonerate them from this mental agony, physical exertion and disassociation from his occupation. Mrs. Kantharia submitted that an appropriate legal order be passed meeting the demand of justice. 6. This Court is astonished to see the entries in the roznama. There is a limit for a witness to attend the Court for the purpose of giving evidence as prosecution witness or defence witness and to return back to house without recording of the evidence. It is true that the pendency of criminal case as well as civil suits, is touching big number. There is a limit for a witness to attend the Court for the purpose of giving evidence as prosecution witness or defence witness and to return back to house without recording of the evidence. It is true that the pendency of criminal case as well as civil suits, is touching big number. But the Presiding Officer of the Court has to marshal out the cases and has to make the best for the purpose of relieving the witnesses who are attending the Court on number of dates. The Constitution is guaranteeing the speedy trial to the accused. That impliedly means that the prosecution witnesses who have been summoned and who are attending the Court for the purposes of trial, have to be discharged as early as possible by recording their evidence. It is the bounden duty of the Presiding Officers of the subordinate courts to find out the cases in which the witnesses are coming to the Court on number of dates and returning back to their houses without their evidence being recorded. Everybody's time is important. Everybody is entitled to allot his time to his occupation. The Presiding Officers of the subordinate courts are to inform themselves appropriately that in these days of haste and bustle of the work and escalating prices, everybody is bound to give more and more time to his occupation for winning the bread for himself and his family members. The shunting to and fro causes serious inconvenience, annoyance and hardship to such witnesses. It is to kept in mind that they come for assisting the cause of justice and, therefore, as early as possible their evidence is to be recorded and they are to be discharged permitting them to follow their course of personal routine life or the business or occupation. 7. Enough is enough, now. This is high time that the Presiding Officer of that Court should take serious note of this renvol of the applicant and the other prosecution witnesses in that case. The trial Court is hereby directed to conduct the trial in which this applicant is coming as a prosecution witness day by day and the case is to be completed positively within a month from the date on which said Court receives this order. No adjournments are to be granted unless there are compelling grounds. The trial Court is hereby directed to conduct the trial in which this applicant is coming as a prosecution witness day by day and the case is to be completed positively within a month from the date on which said Court receives this order. No adjournments are to be granted unless there are compelling grounds. The trial Court is further directed to submit fortnightly report to this Court without any default. So also the trial Court is hereby directed to submit the report after the said trial is completed in accordance with the provisions of law. Failure in this context would be viewed very seriously. 8. The trial Court is further directed to see that in no such case the witnesses should be shunted back to their houses from Court without reasonable cause and without recording the evidence. The witnesses should not be made to attend the Court on and often and should not be returned back to their respective homes without their evidence being recorded. He should call only those witnesses whose evidence can be recorded and some witnesses more. 9. Certified copy expedited. 10. Parties to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Private Secretary. -----