JUDGMENT Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. - This petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 2. The petitioner is A-1 in SC.No.110 of 2016 on the file of the IX Additional District and Sessions Judge Court, Chittoor. 3. He has been facing prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 32, 120-B, 109 r/w 149 IPC, Sections 212, 216 and 201 IPC and under Sections 25(1A), 25(1AAA), 25(1B)(a), 25(1B)(c), 27(3) and 30 of the Arms Act, 1959. 4. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, by wearing a mask, entered the office of the Mayor at Chittoor District along with a pistol and trespassed into the chambers of Mayor during day time and committed murder of the Mayor and shot her at point blank with a pistol and thereafter created a panic situation in the office, threatening the officials working in the office of the Mayor and left the scene of offence. The Mayor died on account of the gunshot injuries sustained in the hands of the petitioner. The said gruesome murder in broad daylight was committed by him in conspiracy with other accused. Therefore, he has committed the aforesaid offences. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last five years in this case and the trial has not commenced till now. In view of the present pandemic situation, there is no possibility for the trial to take place in the near future, therefore, the petitioner has been languishing in jail. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry and he is innocent. His identity is also not established as the person who has committed the said murder of the Mayor covered his face with a mask. Therefore, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the criminal petition. He would submit that the petitioner is the main person, who is behind conspiracy and he is the person who has committed murder of the Mayor in her chambers by trespassing into her office and killing her by firing a pistol at point blank of the Mayor. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the criminal petition. He would submit that the petitioner is the main person, who is behind conspiracy and he is the person who has committed murder of the Mayor in her chambers by trespassing into her office and killing her by firing a pistol at point blank of the Mayor. He would further submit that the petitioner is a notorious criminal and about eleven other crimes were registered against him. In two crimes, he was already convicted. The trial in other nine crimes is pending. Therefore, in view of the criminal history which the petitioner had, that if he is released, there will be no protection to the family members of the deceased person in this case and it is also not possible for the police in the present pandemic situation to provide protection to the family members of the deceased. Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, he would submit that the petitioner is not entitled to bail. He also submitted that the trial has not taken place till now as the other accused and the son of the deceased filed various criminal petitions and writ petitions in the High Courts and obtained stay while seeking appointment of Special Public Prosecutor to conduct trial in this case and as such there are no laches on the part of prosecution in conducting trial in this case. 7. Perused the record. 8. This is a case of gruesome murder of a Mayor which took place in her chambers in the office during day time. As per the version of the prosecution, the petitioner went in disguise to the office of the Mayor by wearing a burqa to conceal his identity and deliberately trespassed into the chamber and fired a pistol against her and killed her and left the office and at that time, some of the witnesses noticed the petitioner and identified him as the assailant. As per the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor, the petitioner is the main culprit, who is behind the conspiracy to commit murder of the Mayor in this case. The record reveals that the accusation made against the petitioner is prima facie well founded. As per the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor, the petitioner is the main culprit, who is behind the conspiracy to commit murder of the Mayor in this case. The record reveals that the accusation made against the petitioner is prima facie well founded. Apart from it, as per the submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor, about eleven other crimes are registered against the petitioner regarding commission of various other offences and that he was already convicted in two crimes and trial in other nine cases is pending against him. The said fact is neither denied nor disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, it clearly shows that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he got a bad criminal history, as he has been indulging in committing various crimes. Therefore, it is evident that he is a notorious criminal. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and manner in which the gruesome murder was committed by him and as there is threat to the witnesses in this case and also the family members in this case in the hands of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that it is not at all desirable to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the said circumstances. If he is released on bail, certainly there is a possibility for him to interfere with the course of justice, in which case, it affects the fair trial of the case. 10. Although it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial has not taken place till now and petitioner has been languishing in jail for the last five years, the record reveals that the delay in conducting the trial is not on account of laches on the part of the prosecution. The record shows that various criminal petitions and writ petitions were filed earlier by some of the other accused in this case and also by the son of the deceased seeking appointment of Public Prosecutor to conduct trial in this case. Since, stay of trial was granted in those petitions, the trial could not take place till now. The record shows that various criminal petitions and writ petitions were filed earlier by some of the other accused in this case and also by the son of the deceased seeking appointment of Public Prosecutor to conduct trial in this case. Since, stay of trial was granted in those petitions, the trial could not take place till now. However, it is now brought to the notice of this Court by both the learned counsel for the petitioner and Public Prosecutor that all those petitions are now disposed of and no stay is pending against the trial in this case and as such, there is absolutely no hurdle or impediment at the present to proceed with the trial of the case. Learned Public Prosecutor also assured that if any direction is given by this Court to expedite the trial of the matter that the prosecution would take appropriate steps as per the direction of this Court to expedite the trial. 11. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances and in view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to bail. However, as the case is pending for the last five years, this Court deems it appropriate that a direction to the trial court to expedite the trial of the case is essential in the present facts and circumstances of the case. 12. In the result, the petition is dismissed. However, the learned Sessions Judge, before whom this case is pending for trial, is directed to expedite the trial of the case. As the trial courts are now permitted to hold virtual courts in view of the present pandemic situation, the trial court, in consultation with the Special Public Prosecutor, if any appointed, and also learned defense counsel appearing for the accused shall decide whether to hold the trial by holding virtual courts or by holding a regular court and commence the trial, as the charges are already framed in this case and fix the trial schedule and complete the trial as early as possible. As it is said that there are 80 witnesses to be examined, the learned Sessions Judge shall take steps to complete the trial within three months period from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As it is said that there are 80 witnesses to be examined, the learned Sessions Judge shall take steps to complete the trial within three months period from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case it is decided to hold regular Court to conduct the trial, the learned Sessions Judge shall take all necessary precautions in the present pandemic situation, while holding the trial of the case.