Hon'ble Amar Saran,J.:- Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate. The applicant was apprehended at about 7.45 AM on 8.4.2010 in village Sirihari selling illicit liquor. One gallon containing 9 lts. of illicit country made liquor and one plastic bag containing 22 pouches of country made liquor were recovered from the applicant. In the said bag some chemical powder and 1/2 kg urea was also found from the possession of the applicant. The applicant confessed that she has purchased the said liquor from one Bhagwat Singh and Rajesh Singh and stated that in order to increase the intoxication, she used to add the powder of diazapam and urea. The case was registered against the applicant under sections 272/273 IPC, 60 Excise Act and 8/22 of NDPS Act at police station Kapsethi, district Varanasi. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the police had implicated the applicant in a case under sections 272/273/304 IPC for which they had visited the village, but the applicant was bailed out in that main case. There is no chemical analyst report of the liquor recovered being spurious or adulterated. So far as the recovery of diazapam from the applicant was concerned, she was granted bail by the lower court. It is further argued that no independent witnesses have supported the recovery and the prosecution version. The applicant was actually present in her Maika and that she was falsely implicated in the present case. Learned AGA, however, argued that it is not material that the applicant was bailed out in the other case under sections 272/273/304 IPC, PS Kapsethi because on arrival at the village police were informed that the applicant was selling liquor at that time and they arrested her committing the present crime red handed. The recovery of urea and chemical along with spurious liquor, which were kept with the purported objective of intensifying the effect of liquor compounded the case against the applicant because adding such adulterant could result in loss of life. In the applicant's village itself some persons appeared to have died as a result of drinking of spurious liquor for which the earlier FIR under sections 272/273/304 IPC at crime No. 24 of 2010 was lodged. In the applicant's village itself some persons appeared to have died as a result of drinking of spurious liquor for which the earlier FIR under sections 272/273/304 IPC at crime No. 24 of 2010 was lodged. As the independent witnesses are usually unwilling to join in dispute to be witnesses of crime as they think the issue does not concern them, the non-examination of independent witnesses is not very material. It is further submitted that as the applicant was arrested on the spot together with the liquor, urea, chemical and powder of diazapam etc. the plea that she was in her Maika at the time of incident, has no leg to stand. The crime of dealing in spurious liquor has assumed grave proportions and many cases have been reported where the consumers have lost their lives because of the poor or spurious quality of the liquor, which is given to them. The offences under sections 272/273 IPC have been made punishable with imprisonment for life in the state of UP. Simply because no public analyst report was available at that stage, it could provide no ground for releasing the applicant on bail. The applicant also has a criminal history and was involved in other offences. It is observed in the order of the learned Sessions judge that if ureas is added in normal alcohol, it gets converted into Methyl alcohol, which is a poisonous substance and can prove fatal for human life. Having given my thoughful consideration to the totality of the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, the trial is expedited. The trial court is directed to make an endeavour to decide the trial, if possible, within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.