JUDGMENT : Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. 1. Let supplementary affidavit filed today in Court be taken on record. 2. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel for complainant, Sri V.B. Singh, Additional Advocate General and Smt. Swati Agarwal as Special counsel appearing for State. 3. The present matter has been nominated by Hon'ble the Chief Justice to this Bench by order dated 25.08.2015. 4. This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant for short term bail on the ground that his mother who is aged about 77 years is confined to bed and is in hospital. It has been further submitted that all three brothers including the applicant are accused in the present case and are in jail, thus, no one is to look after applicant's mother. 5. On the ground of ailment of his mother, an application for short term bail was moved on behalf of the applicant before the learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad, for releasing the applicant on short term bail to take care of his ailing mother, which was rejected on 30.06.2015. Thereafter, the applicant has approached this Court. It is alleged that on 18.05.2015 she again fell severely ill and was immediately hospitalized at Vatsalya Hospital, Civil Lines, Allahabad and after her condition having been improved she was discharged on 08.06.2015. 6. It is further stated that the applicant's mother is a patient of diabetes and blood pressure since past ten years. It was argued that on 14.07.2015 the mother of applicant suffered from brain haemorrhage due to which she is in coma and is on ventilator in the Hospital. Even, she is suffering from old age problems and her condition is deteriorating day by day. Hence, the applicant has preferred this application for short term bail and he deserved to be released as such. 7. Learned counsel for opposite parties has stated that no useful purpose would be served by releasing the applicant as from the argument advanced by the learned counsel for applicant, it appears that the mother of applicant is in coma. Hence, the applicant has preferred this application for short term bail and he deserved to be released as such. 7. Learned counsel for opposite parties has stated that no useful purpose would be served by releasing the applicant as from the argument advanced by the learned counsel for applicant, it appears that the mother of applicant is in coma. However, they do not dispute the factum of ailment of the applicant's mother but they oppose the plea for short term bail of the applicant because there is every likelihood of misuse of the short term bail and that in the garb of short term bail after being released the applicant would not allow to conclude the trial of the present case which is very old and pertains to an incident of the year 1996, which is double murder and in spite of order passed by this Court on 08.04.2015 for expediting the trial within eight months, till date even charges have not been framed against the applicant and the trial proceeding is being delayed at the instance of the accused persons only. 8. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. It appears that, this time, the applicant has not approached the Court below and has directly moved this Court by means of the short term bail application. Of course, from perusal of the record of the case, it reveals that the mother of applicant is hospitalized and is in coma and, on ventilator. Taking into account the factum of ailment and serious condition of his mother, an option of release for one day was offered by the Court to the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant may be allowed to go and see his mother in hospital, Allahabad under police custody in the morning and return to jail by evening, to which the learned counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant does not agree to it and it would not serve the purpose and went on insisting that let the applicant be enlarged on short term bail for a period of two months. 9. Further, it transpires that earlier to this application, a Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was also filed on behalf of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Application No. 23560 of 2015: Suraj Bhan Karwariya Vs. 9. Further, it transpires that earlier to this application, a Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was also filed on behalf of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Application No. 23560 of 2015: Suraj Bhan Karwariya Vs. State of U.P. with prayer to allow the applicant to attend the Session of Legislative Council (Vidhan Parishad Adhiveshan) of U.P. as he is sitting MLC which was scheduled to commence from 14th of August, 2015 to 21.08.2015. But when the said matter had come up on 17.08.2015 before this Court after nomination from the Hon'ble the Chief Justice under His Lordship's Special Order dated 13.08.2015, though the Session of Legislative Council of U.P. was till 21.08.2015, yet a request was made on behalf of the applicant that the said 482 Cr.P.C application may be dismissed as withdrawn and consequently, it was ordered by the Court to be dismissed as withdrawn without any further liberty to file the petition for same cause of action. Now, again, this application on behalf of the applicant for release on short term bail on the ground of ailment of his mother has been filed. 10. Thus, it appears from the conduct of the applicant that he wants to be released from jail on one count or the other and is adamant not to allow the trial to proceed and conclude within eight months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order dated 08.04.2015 passed by this Court for expediting the trial of the case with respect to an old incident of double murder occurred on 13.08.1996. Not only this much but also, taking into account the delay which being caused in the early disposal of the trial of the said case, the matter was also directed to be expedited by the Apex Court vide order dated 05.01.2015 in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 148 of 2014 filed by wife of one of the deceased namely Smt. Vijma Yadav. The Apex Court in that case has requested the Chief Justice of this Court to expedite the hearing of some of the cases pending before this Court which has been filed by the applicant as well as other co-accused persons and consequently the matter was disposed by this Court after nomination by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, vide order dated 08.04.2015 directing the Court below to expedite the trial. 11. 11. This Court as well as other Courts have noticed that when the accused of high profile cases realize that they would not get reliefs from the Courts such as releasing on bail etc., they adopt different methods to attain their goal and it appears that in the garb of ailment of their family members such applications are moved before Courts. In the present case, the trial is proceeding at snail's pace and an inference can be very well drawn that the applicant is hardly interested in seeing his ailing mother but under the garb of the short term bail he wants to delay the trial of the present case so that the case could not be brought to its logical end as has been directed by this Court for expediting and concluding the trial. Hence, in my opinion, there appears to be no ground to allow the short term bail application of the applicant and is liable to be rejected. 12. The application for short term bail in ST No. 351 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 515 of 1996, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34 of IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, PS Civil Lines, District Allahabad lacks merit and it is accordingly rejected. ——————