IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.52748 of 2008 VIKKY KUMAR @ VIKAH KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 31.3.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner facing prosecution for an offence under Section 302 and other allied offences under Indian Penal Code has been as an assailant and in the First Information Report. The plea of the counsel for the petitioner that the name of the petitioner was earlier not revealed by the informant in a U.D. Case filed immediately after the occurrence, could have at least inspired some confidence if there was no independent corroboration of the allegation against the petitioner of being last seen with the deceased. There being however also statement of other persons apart from the informant suggesting that the petitioner had come to the house of the deceased and had taken away the deceased in his company whereafter the deceased never returned back to his house and was eventually found killed, in a brutal 2 manner, would by itself lead to adverse interference against the petitioner of his being involved in the killing of the deceased. That being so, when the petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2007, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Vikky Kumar is hereby rejected. However, trial court is directed to ensure that the charges against the petitioner, if not framed, must be framed within a period of three months from today and thereafter, the trial should be concluded within a period of one year from the date of framing of charge. In the event, the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will have a liberty to move initially before the trial court which will be under obligation to spell out the reasons for not concluding the trial and only thereafter, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before this Court. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)