IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17243 of 2009 TUNTUN SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 25.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. The present case has come to be instituted against the petitioner under several sections of Indian Penal Code under order of the High Court when it was discovered that it is not only suppression of the fact that prayer for bail made by the petitioner was rejected twice earlier but even interpolation in the fardbeyan was made in the subsequent application. This basic fact has emerged during investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was in jail and the mischief was played by somebody else and therefore the benefit of doubt should be given to him. This Court fails to understand such a submission because ultimately it is the petitioner who was the beneficiary or was going to be beneficiary of such act. The allegation prima facie being found to be true against the petitioner as chargesheet has been filed in this case. It is a serious allegation as the petitioner has tried to sully the justice delivery system. If that be so, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the trial of the case should be expedited. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)