ORDER : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the 1st respondent and learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondent No.2. 2. The petitioners (A1 and A3) along with A2 are charge-sheeted by the respondent police in their Crime No. 473/2012 registered in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 394 and 397 of IPC and under Section 14 of Foreigners Act. 3. The allegation is, the accused persons during the night of 08.09.2012 sneaked into the house of the complainant, threatened the complainant and his wife (CW1 and CW2) with knife and caused injuries to CW1, assaulted CW2 with a rod and snatched her gold ornaments and also cash amount from the house. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 04.06.2013, the accused persons were arrested while attempting to commit dacoity by the Neb Saray Police Station, South Delhi. On their voluntary statements, two gold bangles pertaining to the present case is seized from the possession of CW8. During the identification parade held on 24.07.2013, they are identified by CW1 and CW2. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that not even a single time, the petitioners were produced before the Court. For more than 4 years, they are in custody. Accused No.2, who stands on the same pedestal with him, is enlarged on bail by the Trial Court. He undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. 5. Sri. Krishna. S. Dixit, Additional Solicitor General submits that these petitioners are Foreign Nationals. If they enlarged on bail, they will disappear forever and they cannot claim parity with accused No.2 who is enlarged by the concerned Court. Accused No.2 is an Indian National, whereas, these petitioners have illegally entered into the country without Visa and committed the offences punishable under Section 394 of IPC. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4934/2017 submits that he has an identity card issued by the Election Commission which he could not produce by oversight while his petition was being considered by the Sessions Court. 7. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4934/2017 submits that he has an identity card issued by the Election Commission which he could not produce by oversight while his petition was being considered by the Sessions Court. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the 1st respondent submits that without showing any reasons as to why the election identity card could not be produced before the Sessions Court, for the first time the petitioner of Crl.P.4934/2017 is producing the election identity card and the veracity of which cannot be accepted without proper verification. 8. In view of the submissions by the respondent Nos.1 and 2, it is felt that since the allegation also includes offence under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, the petitioners stay in the country, cannot be legalized by enlarging them on bail. However, considering the fact that the petitioners are in custody for last more than 4 years, it is required that the trial shall be expedited. The petitions are rejected. The Sessions Court is directed to procure the presence of the petitioners before the Court by issuing necessary directions to the respondent Investigating Officer, frame the charge and conduct trial on day-to-day basis. In the event the Accused No.3 – Khokan Khan @ Khokan were to press for bail on the basis of his election identity card, liberty is reserved for him to move fresh bail petition before the trial Court and said application shall be adjudicated in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the prosecution. The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as far as possible within six months from the date of communication of this order. Learned counsel for the petitioners is requested to communicate this order to the concerned Court.