IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13523 of 2010 UPENDRA MAHTO, son of Siya Mahto, resident of village- Tirasi (Jaitpur) Police Station- Barahiya, District- Lakhisarai…. Petitoner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 05.08.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner would like to file supplementary affidavit and make correction in the parentage of the petitioner. He is permitted to do so. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner for bail was earlier rejected on merits by order dated 17.9.2009 in Cr. Misc. No. 24419 of 2009. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the trial of the petitioner has already commenced and the witnesses who have been examined till now have not supported the prosecution case and consequently they have also been declared hostile. This Court, however, in view of the fact that there is no fresh material or ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner which had, as noted above, already been dismissed on merit, is not inclined to 2 grant bail to the petitioner, husband who is an accused for offence under Section 304 B of the IPC. Nonetheless, as only official witnesses are said to be not examined in the pending trial of the petitioner, this Court would direct the trial court to ensure that the trial of the petitioner is concluded as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In the event, the trial of the petitioner is not concluded in the aforementioned period, he will have a liberty to first move the trial court who then would record reasons for not concluding the trial and only whereafter the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before this Court. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)