IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6409 of 2011 Hitesh Kumar Ram, S/O-Sri Sita Ram Ram Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 04 05.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Initially, the case was registered on the basis of statement of Shushila Devi who happens to be mother of the deceased but in course of investigation, it came to light that Shushila Devi had illicit relationship with petitioner who happens to be nephew of the aforesaid Shushila Devi and co- accused Shushila Devi as well as this petitioner eliminated the deceased after entering into conspiracy. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that Shushila Devi as well as several other co-accused persons have already been granted privilege of bail whereas petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 21.01.2009. It would appear from perusal of the impugned order as well as submissions of the parties that one Kukri which had been used in committing the murder of the deceased was recovered from the house of Sushil Choupal on the basis of confessional statement made by the petitioner. The learned trial court has reported that out of ten non-official witnesses, five prosecution witnesses have already been examined and furthermore, trial court wants a period of six months more for disposal of case of the petitioner. 2 In the aforesaid circumstance, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Sessions Trial No. 304 of 2009/24 of 2010 arising out of Phulparas (Ghoghardiha) P.S. Case No. 04 of 2009, stands rejected, at least, at this stage. The learned trial court is, hereby, directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within a period as fixed by the court below. It is made clear that if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the court below itself. Shahzad ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)