Hon'ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J. Heard R.C. Gupta, Advocate appearing for the applicants and AGA for the State. 2. Prayer for bail in this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been made on behalf of the applicants Ram Naresh Lodh and Kamal Lohar in Case Crime No. 27 of 2008 under Sections 394, 302, 201, 411 I.P.C. P.S. Malwan, District Fatehpur. 3. Truck no. U.P. 70-B 9678, in which saria was loaded from Premier Alloys Limited Malwan(Fatehpur), was stolen in between 11.30 p.m. to 00.30 a.m. in the intervening night of 2/3-2-2008. An FIR regarding the theft of truck was lodged on 3.2.2008 at 8:30 a.m. at P.S. Malwan, District-Fatehpur by Sayeed Ahmad. Further case of the prosecution is that the said truck was recovered from the accused Ram Naresh Lodh and Kamal Lohar (both applicants herein) in police encounter on 3.2.2008 at about 11.30 a.m. It is also alleged that Asif son of the complainant and Munim Shiv Singh, who were setting in the truck, were murdered and their dead bodies were also recovered on the pointing out of the applicants on 3.2.2008 after recovery of truck. 4. The first and foremost submission made by learned counsel for the applicants is that the incident of committing the theft of truck is said to have occurred in between 11:30 p.m. to 00.30 a.m. in the intervening night of 2/3.2.2008, whereas the said truck is shown to have been recovered from the applicants on 3.2.2008 at 11.30 a.m. which is unbelievable, because during the period of above 12 hours, the applicants could flee away with the truck to some other place. 5. Regarding the recovery of the dead bodies on the pointing out of the applicants, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant is that both the dead bodies are recovered from the open place. It is also submitted in this context that no witness of public was called at the time of alleged recovery of truck and dead bodies and merely on the basis of the statements of police personnel, the complicity of the applicants in the alleged incident cannot be said to be established. 6. Further submission made by learned counsel is that applicant Kamal Lohar was merely the driver, who was driving the truck and he did not commit the murder of deceased persons. 7. 6. Further submission made by learned counsel is that applicant Kamal Lohar was merely the driver, who was driving the truck and he did not commit the murder of deceased persons. 7. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that co-accused Naresh @ Ram Naresh Lodh has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.5.2008 passed in Bail Application No. 14780 of 2008 and hence, on the ground of parity, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 8. It is also submitted that both the applicants are languishing in jail since 3.2.2008 and hence, on the basis of long incarceration in jail, they are entitled to be released on bail, because due to delay in trial, their Fundamental Right of speedy trial envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution is being violated. 9. The bail application has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA contending that stolen truck loaded with saria was recovered in police encounter on 3.2.2008 at about 11.30 a.m. and both the applicants were apprehended on the spot and thereafter on their pointing out, the dead bodies of Asif and Shiv Singh were also recovered and hence, in this heinous crime of committing theft of truck loaded with saria and committing murder of two persons, the applicants should not be enlarged on bail. 10. I have carefully gone through the entire material on record. There is sufficient prima facie evidence to show the complicity of the applicants in the incident of recovery of stolen truck load with saria. Two dead bodies are also alleged to have been recovered on the pointing out of the applicants. Both the applicants were apprehended with loaded truck in police encounter on 3.2.2008 and subsequently, on their pointing out both the dead bodies were recovered. Therefore, having regard to the nature of offences alleged to have been committed by the applicants and their companions and taking the entire material in case diary into consideration, but without expressing any opinion about merit of the case, in this heinous crime of committing theft of loaded truck and murder of two persons, the applicants do not deserve bail. 11. 11. On the ground of parity also, the applicants cannot be released on bail, because the co-accused Naresh @ Ram Naresh Lodh was not apprehended on the spot, whereas both the applicants were apprehended on spot with loaded truck and both the dead bodies were recovered on their pointing out. Otherwise also, parity is not the sole ground for bail as held by this Court in Shahnawaz @ Shanu Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (66) ACC 189. 12. In my considered opinion, on the basis of long incarceration in jail also, the applicants cannot be released on bail in this heinous crime. In this context, reference may be made to the case of Pramod Kumar Saxena vs. Union of India and others 2008 (63) ACC 115, in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that mere long period of incarceration in jail would not be per-se illegal. If the accused has committed offence, he has to remain behind bars. Such detention in jail even as an under trial prisoner would not be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. 13. Consequently, the bail application is hereby rejected. 14. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicants within a period of six months applying the provisions of section 309 Cr.P.C. and avoiding unnecessary adjournments. 15. S.S.P Fatehpur also is directed to depute special messenger to procure the attendance of witnesses after obtaining their summons from the court concerned and it must be ensured that witnesses in the Session trial arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2008 of P.S. Malwan, District- are produced in court without causing any delay. 16. The office is directed to send a copy of this order within a week to the trial court concerned and S.S.P. Fatehpur for necessary action.