IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.211 of 2010 SANJAY KUMAR SINGH @ MAHATMA @ SANJAY SINGH SON OF SHEO KUMAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AGWANPUR, P.S. BARH, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 11.3.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner files supplementary affidavit indicating therein that several other co-accused persons have been granted bail. Keep it on record. Heard Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner, who is in custody in Barh P.S. Case No.49 of 1999 for the offences under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per F.I.R. in the case, the main allegation was made against co-accused Madhushi Singh. Learned counsel further submits that in F.I.R., 15 persons were named as accused and out of 15 accused persons, 10 accused persons have already been granted bail. He refers paragraphs 3 and 4 of the supplementary affidavit. On perusal of - 2 - supplementary affidavit, it is evident that several accused persons have been granted bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accusation against those who have been granted bail are similar to this petitioner and as such petitioner may be granted the privilege of bail. He further submits that the petitioner is in jail since 25.1.2007. I have heard learned counsel for the State also who opposes the prayer for bail and by referring the impugned order, he submits that the petitioner has been alleged as main accused in this case. I have also perused the impugned order which indicates that the petitioner was the main assailant. Learned court below, while rejecting his bail, has observed in its order that the submission of learned P.P. which indicates that several witnesses whose statements were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. had supported the case which indicates that this petitioner was one of the main accused. So far as grant of bail to other accused persons are concerned, the supplementary affidavit - 3 - N.H./ indicates that all those accused persons were granted bail, while this petitioner was not even taken into custody. The petitioner is in jail since 25.1.2007. However, the last person was granted bail on 12.12.2006. As per supplementary affidavit, some of the accused persons were granted bail in the year 1999. The case was instituted in the year 1999. From the order, it is evident that trial has already commenced and witnesses are being examined by the prosecution. Since trial is continuing, it would not be advisable to grant the privilege of bail to this petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected. Since the petitioner is in jail from 25.1.2007, it is desirable to direct the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)