ORDER : J.B PARDIWALA, J.: Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Patel, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with C.R.No.I-87 of 2013 registered with the Khambhaliya Police Station, Jamnagar, of the offence punishable under Sections 409, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The charge-sheet which came to be filed against the applicant herein culminated in Criminal Case No. 521 of 2001 in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khambhaliya. 4. It appears that the applicant was arrested on 30th November 2014. On 25th April 2014, charge-sheet was filed. Since his bail application was rejected by the Courts below, he came before this Court by filing the Criminal Misc. Application No. 850 of 2015. The said application came to be rejected vide order dated 2nd February 2015, which reads as under: “This is an application for regular bail filed by the applicant-accused arrested in connection with C.R No.I-87 of 2013, registered with the Khambhaliya Police Station, of the offence punishable under Sections 409, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 477(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was arrested on 30.1.2014. The investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant herein was serving as a Deputy Mamlatdar, Khambhaliya and was in-charge of the Stamp Valuation Cell. It is alleged that many persons who were issued notice to make good the deficit stamp duty had approached before this applicant and had deposited the amount in cash. However, the applicant herein as a Deputy Mamlatdar, failed to account for the same and used the money for his own purpose. It is alleged that in all he committed criminal misappropriation of Rs. 24,04,129/-. The regular bail is prayed for substantially on two grounds that the offence is magistrate triable and that the charge-sheet has been filed. However, none of the two grounds urged have appealed to me considering the fact that there is a misappropriation of Rs. 24 lac, which is not disputed. This application is rejected.” 5. In the charge-sheet, in all 47 witnesses have been cited. The charge came to be framed by the trial Court on 17th November 2014. However, none of the two grounds urged have appealed to me considering the fact that there is a misappropriation of Rs. 24 lac, which is not disputed. This application is rejected.” 5. In the charge-sheet, in all 47 witnesses have been cited. The charge came to be framed by the trial Court on 17th November 2014. Since the trial did not conclude within 60 days from the date of issue of the summons to the first witness, the applicant preferred an application under Section 437(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for bail. The same was ordered to be rejected by the Court below. Since the applicant is in jail past almost three years, he has once again preferred this application for bail. 6. On 12th August 2016, the following order was passed: “It appears that the applicant-accused is in custody past 2 & ½ years. The trial is going on in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khambhaliya. In a past 2 & ½ years only four witnesses have been examined so far. I am told that almost 40 witnesses are likely to be examined by the prosecution. Considering the pace at which the trial is progressing and the fact that about 40 more witnesses are to be examined, the trial is not likely to concluded in the near future. The Registry is directed to call for the report from the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khambhaliya, as regards the status of the Criminal Case No. 521 of 2014. Post the matter on 26/08/2016.” 7. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khambhaliya, has sent his report, inter alia, stating as under: “Returned with respects to: The Registrar General High Court of Gujarat, AHMEDABAD Through:- The Honorable Principal District Judge Saheb, Jamnagar Respected Sir, (1) The Writ of Hon'ble High Court No. 162429 of 2016 dated 12/08/2016 in connection with the Criminal Misc. Application (For Regular Bail) No. 19470/2016 was received on 23/08/2016 in connection with Criminal Case No. 521/2014. (2) The Accused was arrested on 30/01/2014 and till today he is undertrial prisoner. (3) The Charge sheet filed on 25/04/2014 and entered as Criminal Case No. 521/2014. (4) As per the charge sheet there are 47 witnesses on record. Application (For Regular Bail) No. 19470/2016 was received on 23/08/2016 in connection with Criminal Case No. 521/2014. (2) The Accused was arrested on 30/01/2014 and till today he is undertrial prisoner. (3) The Charge sheet filed on 25/04/2014 and entered as Criminal Case No. 521/2014. (4) As per the charge sheet there are 47 witnesses on record. (5) The Charge has been framed on 17/11/2014 vide Ex.30 (6) The 3 witnesses were examined. (7) Various correspondence with police station was carried out for bringing muddamal/Documents as per the oral submission on behalf of prosecution but due to clarification regarding FSL of the muddamal the trial was delayed. (8) A copy of the writ recorded in this case vide Ex.64 (9) A note regarding order of the Honorable High Court has been made in the relevant register. (10) The next date of this case is on 24/08/2016.” 8. It appears that although charge-sheet was framed way back on 17thNovember 2014, yet till this date the prosecution has been able to examine only three witnesses out of 47 cited in the charge-sheet. The pace at which the trial is progressing would indicate that it is going to take very long time before the same is concluded finally. Although this Court in the past had rejected the bail application taking into consideration the fact that the applicant herein is a public servant and is charged with the offence of having misappropriated a sum of Rs. 24 lac, yet considering the fact that almost three years are over and only three witnesses have been examined out of 47, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant. 9. Hence, the present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with CR.No.I-87 of 2013 registered with the Khambhaliya Police Station, Jamnagar, on executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) with a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that: (a) he shall mark his presence once in a month at the Khambhaliya Police Station, Jamnagar, on Sunday between 10:00 a.m and 2:00 p.m; (b) he shall regularly appear before the trial Court on the dates fixed for hearing; (c) he shall not try to tamper with the evidence or contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly; 10. The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 11. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. 12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.