JUDGMENT Jay Sengupta, J. - This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a trial under sections 323, 498A and 506 of the Penal Code. 2. Let a copy of this application be served upon Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya and Mr. M. F. A. Begg, learned advocates, who are present in Court and who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. Their engagement may be regularised in due course by the competent authority of the State. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the de facto complainant in this case. Although, the First Information Report was lodged in 2007 and the charges were framed in 2012, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. There are only about twelve witnesses in this case. The examination of PW 10 is continuing since 2017. On several dates either the learned court adjourned the matter or the witnesses were not present. The trial has remained pending for no fault on the part of the present petitioner. 4. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition. 5. No prejudice will be caused to anyone if a direction for expeditious disposal of the case is passed. 6. It appears that the trial is pending for an unduly long period and for some reason or the other, the examination of PW 10 has dragged on for a long time. 7. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I request the learned trial court to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties, preferably within ten months from the next date of hearing. 8. With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of. 9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.