JUDGMENT : 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. 2. Learned counsel for the opposite party Mr. T. N. Verma is also present. 3. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs: - “That in the instant application, the petitioner prays for invocation of the inherent powers of this Hon’ble Court for quashing the order dated 28.6.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi in Special Case No. 47 of 2010 (Khunti P.S. Case No. 93 of 2010 and G.R. No. 258 of 2010), whereby and whereunder, the learned Special Judge, Vigilance was pleased to find a prima facie case against the present petitioner and accordingly took cognizance for the offences under Section 161, 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7/13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act as also for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No. 93 of 2010, corresponding to Special Case No. 47 of 2010, and this case is now pending in the Court of Sri Abni Ranjan Kumar Sinha, learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar order may be passed in this case which is passed in Cr. M.P. No. 2918 of 2019 dated 24.02.2020. She submits that similar matters have been disposed of in connection with the same petitioner, against whom under identical circumstances a number of cases were instituted. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party has no serious objection to the prayer made. 6. Cr. M.P. No. 2918/2019 was filed by the present petitioner in connection with another case of some what similar nature which has been disposed of vide order dated 24.02.2020. Para-2 to 6 of the aforesaid order reads as under: - “2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the charge in the present case was framed on 03.08.2012, but till today, the trial of the case has not yet concluded. She submits that the matter is still at the stage of evidence and some of the witnesses have been examined. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that she would be satisfied, if some observation is made regarding expeditious disposal of the case before the learned court below. 4. The learned counsel for the opposite party submits that they shall also cooperate with early disposal of the case. 5. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that she would be satisfied, if some observation is made regarding expeditious disposal of the case before the learned court below. 4. The learned counsel for the opposite party submits that they shall also cooperate with early disposal of the case. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party- Anti Corruption Bureau, this petition is disposed of with observation that the learned court below shall make endeavour for expeditious disposal of the trial 6. So far as the impugned order is concerned, this Court finds that no argument as such has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.” 7. In the instant case, it is submitted that the charge has been framed as back as in the year 2012 and the trial has begun. In view of the submissions made by the parties, this petition is disposed of with an observation that the learned court below shall make endeavour for expeditious disposal of trial. 8. So far as the impugned order is concerned, this Court finds that no argument as such has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX’.