IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.1716 OF 2009 PRADEEP MAHASETH, SON OF YOGENDRA MAHASETH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA PANDA SARAI, POLICE STATION LAHERIA SARAI, DISTRICT DARBHANGA VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR ******** 4 01/04/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner’s bail application was earlier rejected. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the evidence of witnesses is now over. It is submitted that during the evidence, materials that has come against this petitioner is that he is the neighbour of the victim boy and his father. It appears that the victim boy has identified the petitioner as Pradeep uncle along with some other co-accused persons. In the circumstances, I do not think that it would be proper to grant bail to the above named petitioner at this stage as only the arguments are now left to be made in the case. Accordingly, the prayer for bail on behalf of the above named petitioner is rejected. Since, the evidence is closed, it is hoped that the arguments would be made expeditiously by 2 the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. The Court should also see that no unnecessary adjournments are given to the either parties. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )