IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1853 of 2011 Daya Shankar Yadav, S/O-Dina Nath Yadav Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 05 13.07.2011 Supplementary affidavit is filed bringing the Photostat copy of the post-mortem report. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is in jail custody since 08.05.2010 in a case registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. There is specific allegation against the petitioner that he mercilessly assaulted the deceased. Although, the informant is not an eye-witness of the alleged occurrence and he came to know about the alleged occurrence from one Mira Devi who supported her statement and claimed to be an eye-witness of the alleged occurrence in course of investigation. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the genesis of the occurrence has not been disclosed by the prosecution either in first information report or in course of investigation. It is also contended by him that the ocular and medical evidence do not support the allegation levelled against the petitioner as only one injury on the head of the deceased has been found and if the prosecution version is correct, there must be several injuries on the person of the deceased but I am not, at all, convinced with the aforesaid submission and in my view, the aforesaid facts would be considered at the time of trial. 2 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as this aspect of the matter that there is specific allegation of committing murder against the petitioner, I am not inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 340 of 2010 arising out of Ara (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 87 of 2010 pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Ara, stands rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner. SHAHZAD ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)