IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6779 of 2011 Munchun Sah, Son of Ram Ekbal Sah, Resident of Village Khartari Tola Dharohara, P.S. Chiraiya, Dist. East Champaran. -------- Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ---------- Opp. Party ----------- 6 24.08.2011 Having heard Mr. Lalit Kishor, learned Additional Advocate General No.1 appearing on behalf of the Superintendent of Police, Motihari as also Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, this Court would find that the Superintendent of Police, Motihari had somehow given a mistaken impression to this Court on 18.5.2011 that the evidence of the prosecution could be closed on 21.5.2011. Today the Superintendent of Police, Motihari has informed that prosecution has to examine one more witness namely the Judicial Magistrate who had recorded the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Learned A.A.G.-I has also informed this Court that a prayer has already been made before the trial court by the A.P.P. on 20th of August, 2011 for examination of Judicial Magistrate. This Court would accordingly direct the trial court to ensure that the concerned 2 Judicial Magistrate is made to appear at the earliest possible point of time so that the prosecution can complete its evidence. The Superintendent of Police, Motihari will inform the Trial Court the name of the Judicial Magistrate as also the present place of posting so that information to this effect could be sent to him by the trial court for his being examined in the case. Now as the prosecution has virtually examined all its witnesses barring the aforesaid Judicial Magistrate, this Court would also hope and believe that the trial of the petitioner can be concluded within a period of three months from the date of examination of the Judicial Magistrate, inasmuch as, the prosecution itself intends to file a petition for closure of its evidence immediately after examination of the Judicial Magistrate. In view of the fact that the end of the trial of the petitioner is well in sight, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage and, accordingly, the prayer for bail of the 3 petitioner, namely, Munchun Sah is hereby rejected but, then, the trial court must ensure that the trial of the petitioner is concluded at the earliest possible point of time if necessary by also proceeding on day to day basis. With the aforesaid observations and directions this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)